Foreign Direct Investment in

India's Retail Sector

An exhaustive analysis of factors influencing the FDI debate 2009

An All India Retail Research Report

 Abstract

In 2006 the Government has promoted limited FDI in single-brand retailing and
has considered opening up further in a phased system with emphasis on joint
ventures with domestic players, evident with the highly controversial Wal-Mart
joint venture with Bharti. Studying other countries such as China, where
restrictions were initially imposed on the locations and formats in which foreign
retailers could operate is also on the agenda of the Indian Government.

The Indian media regularly discusses the issues of FDI in Retailing. The Hindu
Business Line's opinion on the 'Great FDI in Indian Retail debate', is that “organized
retail at present accounts for a mere 4% per cent of the total market (2008) as
against 20% in China and 40 % in Thailand” and that “there is a growing demand
for modern retailing formats that offer a clean and hygienic environment to shop
1
in”. This has created significant debate for allowing FDI regulations to open up,
although little has changed for multi-brand retailing restrictions to date.

Knight Frank revealed in their Market Review (Q3 2006) that the move by the
Indian Government to allow FDI in real estate had been an “opportune move” and
although “multi-brand retailing is still not allowed, FDI in single-brand retailing
2
has elicited heightened interest”.

1. http://www.hindubusinessline.com/2005/11/24/stories/2005112403131800.htm
2. Knight Frank – 'Market Review' Quarter 3 2006

02
 Contents Page

Abstract 02
Contents 03
Table of Figures & Charts 05

Chapter 1 - Introduction 06
1.1 Rationale 07
1.2 Report Aims & Objectives 08
1.3 Layout of Study 09

Chapter 2 – Study Methodology 10-14

Chapter 3 – Historical Perspective on FDI

3.0 Overview 15-17
3.0.1 Post Independence & Pre-reform 17
3.0.2 Post-reform 18-20
3.0.3 FDI in Retail 21-22

Chapter 4 – Policy Environment and Growth in Organized Retailing

4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment 23-28
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing 29-34

Chapter 5 – Arguments for and against FDI in Retailing

5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing 35-42
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing 43-50

Chapter 6 – Detailed analysis of factors and conditions attached to FDI

6.0 Survey Design & Sample 51-52
6.1 Questions (See Appendix II) 52
6.2 Data Analysis 53-56
6.3 Results & Findings
6.3.1 – 6.3.11 57-64

03
Chapter 7 - Conclusion
7.0 Introduction 65
7.1 Indian market place and Policy & Regulation 65-66
7.2 Arguments for and against Policy Change 67-68
7.3 Market sentiment and exploration of domestic retailer's thoughts 69-70
7.4 Recommendations (7.4.1 – 7.4.17 inclusive) 71-73
7.5 Further Research 74

Appendix I – Coding Key (open ended question interpretation) 75-77

Appendix II – Survey Questions 78-79

Reference List 80-82

Bibliography 83

04
 Table of figures & charts

1. Figure 1 20
2. Figure 2 29
3. Figure 3 30
4. Figure 4 51
5. Chart S1 53
6. Chart S2 53
7. Chart S3 54
8. Chart S4 54
9. Chart S5 54
10. Chart S6 55
11. Chart S7 55
12. Chart S8 55
13. Chart S9 56
14. Chart S10 56
15. Chart S11 56

05
 Chapter 1 - Introduction
India is without doubt a 'growth' economy and
many consider it an attractive country to invest
in, particularly in its rapidly growing and
changing retail market. However, Foreign
Direct Investment (FDI) is restricted in the retail
sector, and despite many years of debate, the
regulations are still only changing very slowly
and there are still lots of uncertainties.
AT Kearney (2009), the well-established
international management consultancy, in their
Annual Global Retail Index, ranked India as No.
1 out of 30 of the top emerging markets, and
3
has done for some years. Foreign Investors are
watching India, ready for a piece of the action in
the retail market, but there are still plenty of
uncertainties, restrictions and potential socio-
economic risks.
3. 2009 Global Retail Development Index, AT Kearney – http://www.atkearney.com/images/global/pdf/2009_Global_Retail_Development_Index.pdf
06
This division of the retail sector, which has a
very heavy weighting towards, unorganized, is
just one of the issues contributing to the
sensitive debate on FDI in India at the moment.
What are the potential risks to the unorganized
retail sector, and of course to the wider Indian
economy? There are several groups who are
strongly opposed to FDI in the Indian retail
sector, but are their concerns unfounded?
Equally, could FDI in retail be a disaster for the
sector and the Indian economy? What reforms
are necessary, if any, to protect the sub-
continent's domestic retail sector and national
interests?
India is a very diverse country and it is
important to fully understand its nature. There
is cultural and religious diversity like nowhere
else in the world, a thriving democracy along
with bureaucratic inconveniences and serious
infrastructure deficiencies.
 1.1 Rationale

From street/cart retailers working on widely debated and heated issue in India's
pavements/roadsides and small family run economic and political environment.
businesses to international brands such as However, the Government is gradually taking
Rolex and Nike, the retail market in India is steps to open the sector.” (KPMG 2009)
5

vibrant, colorful and highly fragmented.

We also wish to look at the issues which are
Arvind Virmani (2005), the Director & Chief currently under discussion by the domestic
Executive of the Indian Council for Research on players about FDI in India's retail sector, to
International Economic Relations (ICRIER) establish an understanding of the reasoning
acknowledged when referring to FDI in India's behind current policy and the controversial
retail sector that “In spite of its importance, viewpoints that keep India divided on FDI Retail
there has not been any extensive research in policy. This research will provide
4
this area.” recommendations for ways in which policy
could be changed and improved to reduce the
It is this lack of independent research that risks of FDI for India, and to benefit the
specifically focuses on the retail sector that has domestic retailers and related industries as well
inspired us to undertake this study so as to as the economy as a whole. There is a desire to
provide a balanced and independent review of try to assist in facilitating the process of reform
current opinions/thoughts on FDI in Retail by providing a summary of the key issues and
policy, and to assess the potential costs and suggesting what regulatory reforms could be
benefits for the sector and India as a whole. considered to help India resolve the issues that
this report highlights. sector and the Indian
“As retailing in India is attracting the attention economy? What reforms are necessary, if any,
of many global players, the Indian Government to protect the sub-continent's domestic retail
is paying increased attention to the country's sector and national interests?
retail environment. FDI in retailing remains a

4. Mukherjee A & Patel, N, 'FDI in Retail Sector India', Academic Foundation in association with ICRIER, 2005,
quoted from foreword by A Virmani
5. KPMG, 'Doing Business with India' Report, July 2009, page 85

07

The aim of this report is to provide an analysis
of the arguments for and against FDI in India's
retail sector, in order to provide
recommendations on reforms to government
policy that could reduce the risks of lifting
restrictions on FDI in retail.
The report's objectives are to investigate the
Indian market place and review current policy
and regulations with regards to foreign
investors so as to gain an understanding of the
current position on FDI, as well as an overview
of the Indian system. This will be followed by an
examination of the arguments both for and
1.2 Report Aims & Objectives
against changing current policy and improving
the regulatory environment. This will enable us
to assess the key factors to be considered in
making policy changes in the future.
The next objective will then be to compare the
thoughts and opinions of people working within
or alongside India's domestic retail sector, via a
survey, to interpret the domestic market
sentiment towards foreign investment, and to
explore thoughts on the issues faced by the
sector. It will then be possible to consider what
solutions could potentially resolve the issues
and are supported by the majority of domestic
retail players.
 1.2 Layout of Report

Chapter 1 will present the problem and reason behind the study (rationale). It will set out
the aims and objectives of the report and give an outline of what the report will involve.

Chapter 2 will detail the approach and methods of research used to collect data for the
survey. It will also look at data sources and the limitations of the research & data.

Chapter 3 will provide a historical perspective starting with an overview of FDI in India.

Chapter 4 will explain the current policy framework with respect to FDI in India and chart
the growth of organized retailing in India.

Chapter 5 will present arguments from both sides – those who are for and those who are
against FDI in retail in India.

Chapter 6 will analyze the factors influencing FDI to a greater level of detail with the aid of
a survey conducted amongst the domestic retail and allied industries in India. The survey
results will be analyzed and interpreted, with the findings presented.

Chapter 7 will present conclusions and recommendations based on the overall findings of
the study.

09
 Chapter 2 - Study Methodology
This particular study on FDI in India's retail
sector will utilize an inductive approach to the
research, which should help to achieve the aim
and objectives set out in Chapter 1. The
investigation will allow us to form a reasoned
opinion as to what government policy changes
are required to make the opening up of FDI in
retail as successful as possible for the domestic
market and India's economy.
This study will be based predominantly on
qualitative research techniques, using primary
as well as secondary methods, in order to allow
for an in-depth and insightful exploration of
current issues surrounding FDI in India's Retail
market, and to assist in gaining an
understanding of the 'sentiment' in India
towards foreign retailers and their potential
impact on the retail sector and wider economy.
There will be a certain amount of quantitative
analysis undertaken with the data received from
the proposed research survey, but this will be
interpreted alongside 'qualitative' open-ended
questions too, so as to offer more depth to the
respondents' opinions.
10
2.0 Study Approach
The report hopes to establish if there is a
genuine argument for government policy to
change in favor of FDI in retail, to assess and
make recommendations of changes to current
policy, and to consider the risks to India's
economy, society, and the unorganized retail
sector, with a view to encouraging 'socially
responsible investment'.
To initiate this study, three questions were
originally designed to help construct aims and
objectives, and to provide some initial focus.
The three questions were:
1. What methods of FDI in retail are currently
permitted and what is the policy?
2. What are the key issues concerning FDI policy
change in India's retail sector?
3. How can policy help to reduce the risk of FDI
in retail for India and its domestic markets?
 2.1 Study Techniques

2.1.1 Types of Research

Primary research in the form of an internet-
based survey was used to collect data of a
qualitative open-ended nature, using a
descriptive approach so that the report can
analyze and interpret the Indian domestic retail
market's sentiment towards FDI and how many
people are in favor of various aspects, as well as
ask what changes to policy and the sector they
believe are necessary and why.
The survey also includes quantitative 'closed-
ended' questions for gathering data that can be
analyzed and interpreted alongside the follow-
up open-ended questions.
Secondary research was carried out in the form
of a literature review, to compare and contrast
material and interpret the issues with a view to
drawing conclusions and developing
recommendations.

2.1.2 Literature Review

There is a reasonable amount of literature be revealed by the survey.
available on FDI in India, although it is by no It is important with a review such as this to
means abundant in the specific area of Retail. ensure that the sources of information are
Current policy is in a state of flux; hence a reliable and trustworthy as possible. A broad
review of literature on the latest policy range of opinions from institutional and
proposals and arguments for and against corporate material, to academic and business-
changing policy will be the back-bone of this orientated literature as well as the
study. It will enable accurate and relevant newspapers/online media and internet
questions to be formulated for the proposed resources will be reviewed and each source was
survey questionnaire and provide a good considered for its reliability, and potential to
background understanding of the likely misconstrue the truth.
causes of any patterns and trends that may

11

2.1.3 Survey Questionnaire
Qualitative survey questionnaires will
inherently have issues of 'interpretation' of
results, due to the open-ended questions and
subjective nature. It may also suffer
complications with data inaccuracy, for
example, if participants are unwilling to give
honest opinions on their views of particular
subjects, or through incorrect interpretation of
sentiment in a participant's responses by the
researcher. This can be minimized by ensuring
that the questions are pre-planned well to
ensure they gather the correct information that
will help to answer the questions underlying
this research, and that are clear and concise to
12
2.1 Study Techniques
take in to account possible language skill
differences/difficulties in participants. By
ensuring the questions are directly related to
the objectives of this research will increase the
quality of the results achieved and help to justify
the use of this research technique. The
structure should be so that bias is minimized
with questions that do not lean towards
encouraging a particular response from the
participant.
Coding will be required for analysis and
interpretation of the open-ended questions.
NB: For further information on the survey
sample and design, please see Chapter 4.

2.2.1 Primary Data Sources
The primary data sources in this research were
collected via an emailed survey questionnaire
(see Appendix II). We designed a test survey to
be emailed to a pre-selected 'test-sample'.
2.2.2 Secondary Data Sources
2.2.2.1 Internet
Searching the internet extensively the starting
point of this research and provided some
valuable secondary data. Website such as the
Government of India's Ministry of Finance
www.finmin.nic.in which provides information
on current FDI policy through the Foreign
Investment Promotion Board (FIPB), and also
provides press releases and data and statistics
2.2.2.2 Academic Textbooks
There is a vast amount of literature on FDI in
general; however there is less on FDI in India,
and limited amounts that are specifically
focused on the retail sector. The available text
on general FDI were useful background
research though, and the more specific texts
2.2.2.3 News Articles and Industry Reports
To obtain up to date information and opinions
on the research topic it was necessary to refer to
domestic and international news articles and
gather a variety of industry reports and papers,
for example the India Brand Equity Foundation
(IBEF) report on India's Retail Market &
13
2.2 Data Sources
The final survey was then sent out to a
significant sample of Indian retailers and others
in retail-related industries.
have been useful. The report also references
some small domestic industry group's website
useful, and other trade lobby sites. One
particular notable internet resource was the
Center for Policy Alternatives
(www.cpasind.com) which have provided
particularly informative reports on some of the
key issues with FDI in Indian Retail.
such as 'FDI in Retail Sector India' by Arpita
Mukherjee & Nitisha Patel and 'Multinationals in
India' by Amar Nayak were utilized to a greater
extent as this report considered them to be far
more relevant to the debate on this research
topic.
Opportunities, and India FDI Watch's report in
association with the Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). All of
these helped to provide a wide and balanced
understanding of the key issues of this
research.
 2.3 Limitations of Research Study

2.3.1 Survey Response Limitations

Due to the nature of the survey being very large sample base. Survey responses were
internet/online-based, it was inevitable that also potentially limited by the length of the
this would have limitations on survey response; survey and by language barriers.
however this was counterbalanced by using a

2.3.2 Inconsistency of Data & Statistics available on

India and FDI/ Retail
We noted that data available, particularly in
relation to India's retail sector, was often
inconsistent. However, for the purposes of this
research being more of an exploratory nature,
this did not have too much impact on the
findings. Up-to-date data was also hard to
source.

14
 Chapter 3 - Historical Perspective on FDI
It has been said that India has “one foot
grounded in time-honoured traditions and the
other fervently striding into the entrepreneurial
6
e-age”. India truly does embrace diversity with
a passion like very few places in the world.
This study is focused on the retail sector and the
'current' Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
position in India, and it therefore seems logical
to start in reasonably recent times.
Retailing can normally be defined as “the sale of
goods or merchandise from a fixed location,
such as a department store or kiosk, or by post,
in small or individual lots
8
consumption by the purchaser.”
6. Lonely Planet, 'India', 10th Edition, Lonely Planet Publishing Pty Ltd, August 2003, page 32
7. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~alandear/glossary/f.html
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/retailin
9. Mohan Guruswamy et al, FDI in India's Retail Sector, Centre for Policy Alternatives, CPAS (2005)
3.0 Overview
Retailing in India is slightly different than in
developed markets, in that it is divided in to
organized and unorganized retail. Organized
retail could be described as when trading is
taking place under a License or through people
that are registered for sales tax or income tax.
Unorganized retail is India's more traditional
style of “low-cost retailing, for example, the
local kirana shops, owner-manned general
stores, paan/beedi shops, convenience stores,
9
hand carts and pavement vendors.”
for direct
Before beginning however, let us briefly define
'Foreign Direct Investment', and 'Retailing', as
they are the key focus of the entire study.
Foreign Direct Investment can be defined as the
“Acquisition or construction of physical capital
by a firm from one (source) country in another
(host) country.”7
15
 3.0 Overview

Sathyaraj (2006) defines unorganised retailing

more specifically as “an outlet run locally by the
owner or caretaker of a shop that lacks
technical and accounting standardization. The
supply chain and sourcing are also done locally
to meet local needs.”10

Radhika (2006) goes on to be more explicit India is a democratic Union of States and the
about the differences, saying “The major Government operates through a parliamentary
difference between organized and system. India has also been a member of the
unorganized retailing lies in its number World Trade Organization (WTO) since 1995.
(chain) of store operations. An unorganized The World Trade Organization is a place
outlet may be just stand alone or can have [a] “where member governments go, to try to sort
maximum of 2-3 outlets in a city, where as out the trade problems they face with each
the organized outlets are "any retail chain other”12 They are currently actively
(more than two outlets) which is participating in the Doha Round which
professionally managed (even if its family “provides the mandate for negotiations on a
run), has an accounting transparency… and range of subjects and other work. The
organized Supply Chain Management with negotiations include those on agriculture and
centralized quality control and sourcing services, which began in early 2000.”13
(certain parts can be locally made) can be
termed as an "organized retailing" in India.”11

10. Sathyaraj (2006) - http://retail-industry.blogspot.com/2006/04/definition-of-unorganized-retailing.html

11. Radhika (2006) - http://retail-industry.blogspot.com/2006/04/definition-of-unorganized-retailing.htm
12. World Trade Organisation - http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/tif_e.htm
13. World Trade Organisation - http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/dda_e.htm

16

India is the most populous democracy in the
world, and is the second most populated
country at 1.172 billion people, based on
14
United Nation statistics as at 1st July 2009.
has a largely young population with 35% of
India's population being under 14 years of age
and more than 60 per cent of the population is
3.0.1 Post Independence & Pre-Reform
There were “half-hearted attempts made by the
Rajiv Gandhi government in the mid-1980s to
selectively open the economy to foreign trade
and relax import restrictions, which did not
have the intended consequence of stimulating
investment and eventually pushed the balance
of payments out of gear. Export growth had
turned negative and for the first time Indian
industrial production recorded negative
growth. “
16
In 1990-91 the current account deficit was 3.1%
17
and inflation was 12%. Things began to get out
of hand and the government went to foreign
lenders pledging gold held at the Reserve Bank
of India (India's central bank) for short term
loans so as to help get through the financial
crisis. In 1990, just as China was beginning to
become a popular place for investors, India was
in the middle of economic agony after many
years of over-zealous government control over
14. Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population
15. Census of India - http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/glance.aspx
16. Chaze, Aaron, An Investor's Guide to the Next Economic Superpower, John Wiley & Sons pte, Ltd 2006, page 22
17. Chaze, Aaron, An Investor's Guide to the Next Economic Superpower, John Wiley & Sons pte, Ltd 2006, page 7
3.0 Overview
estimated to make up the working age group
(15-60). The large working-age population will
no doubt translate to an attractive consumer
It base compared to other economies of the world,
placing India as one of the main targets of the
global retail players.15
economic activity, isolation and poorly
managed fiscal policy. By half way through
1991, the Indian government was about to
default on its foreign currency loans; and its
foreign exchange reserves were so low that
India only had enough dollars for two weeks'
worth of imports.
Foreign finance had all but closed the door on
India. The political problems that this position
caused were immense and it was only the
recognition of the fiscal problems that finally
persuaded the politicians and bureaucrats to
release their hold on the economy. The crisis
brought around something totally unexpected;
it brought around change from a completely
uncompromising centralized system of control
to a market-orientated system, where
regulation in some of the key sectors of the
economy was to be enforced independent of the
government.
17

3.0.2 Post-Reform
Economic reform was now on the agenda after
the financial disaster of 1991; and these
reforms “brought in three elements that India
was never previously allowed to have:
competition, entrepreneurship
beginnings of world-class infrastructure.”
The government of the time, Congress (led by
Narasimha Rao), revealed a new 'industrial
policy' and the Finance Minister when sending a
memorandum dated 27th August 1991 to the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), said “The
thrust will be to increase the efficiency and
international competitiveness of industrial
production and to utilize foreign investment
and technology to a much greater degree than
in the past, to improve the performance and
rationalize the scope of the public sector, and to
reform and modernize the financial sector so
that it can more efficiently serve the needs of
the economy” (Cited by Datt and Sundharam,
2001:231)
19
Between 1991 and 1999 as India moved away
from a state controlled economy and slowly
developed into a liberalized economy, each
18. Chase, Aaron, 'An Investor's Guide to the Next Economic Superpower', John Wiley & Sons pte, Ltd 2006, page 11
19. Sagarika Dutt, 'India in a Globalized World', Manchester University Press, 2006, page 111
20. Kaliappa Kalirajan and Ulaganathan Sankar, 'Economic Reform and the Liberalization of the Indian Economy',
MPG Books Ltd, 2003, page 40
3.0 Overview
successive government has supported the
reform process and tried to hasten things. Due
to the ever decreasing role of the government in
the economy, resource allocation began to be
and the influenced by the markets, and as a result,
18
prices & availability across the economy became
competitive rather than monopolistic.
The post-reform performance of the economy
had been good, and between 1994 and1997
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew in real
terms by over 7%, which placed India among the
best-performing countries in the world.
However, a study of the economic reforms and
liberalisation of the Indian economy by Kalirajan
and Sankar (2003) acknowledges this but
highlights that whilst this economic growth is
encouraging, “there is no doubt that given the
low per capita income the need for an
accelerated growth rate becomes urgent. The
inflation rate was on average at a high of 10.7%
per annum in the first five years of the reform
period, but gradually came down to less than 5%
20
in the last few years”.
18
 3.0 Overview

3.0.2 Post-Reform
The Indian National Congress with the support a year. In 2005 and 2006 growth accelerated to
of the United Progressive Alliance have been in over 8% and in 2007 it looked like it might be
23
government since 2004 and were re-elected for well over 9%.”
a further term in May 2009. Although a more
liberal approach to foreign investment in India Farndon (2007) discusses how the development
has emerged in recent times, Kalirajan and of the Indian economy has been quite
Sankar (2003) argue that “low overall unconventional. He highlights a 'normal'
productivity of investment, excessive pattern of economic development starting with
fragmentation of markets, shortage of the emergence of cheap & low-cost
invertible funds, and the poor infrastructure manufacturing to provide a broad base of
may pose significant problems to sustained employment for the masses, which
higher economic growth… there is reason to subsequently encourages urbanization, and as
believe that growth impulses from the first this continues to grow, he notes a shift whereby
21
generation of reforms may have ebbed”. higher value products that are more
sophisticated emerge. Finally, service and high
The Indian government has clearly recognized tech industries start to emerge.
this, and in the Finance Minister's Budget
Speech for 1999-2000, it was stressed that Farndon (2007) highlights the issue of job
there was a need to debate and make decisions insecurity in India, and how few people are
in relation to the next wave of reforms to be put employed in a recognized position. To explain,
in place to ensure India's economic strength he uses the example that in 2006, India had a
and to make it “fully capable of competing workforce of 470 million, but only 35 million of
successfully in the evolving world order”. (cited these (approx. 7%) were in formal, income tax
22
by Kalirajan and Sankar 2003) paying positions – and of this 35 million, the
majority (21 million) are employed by the
The liberalizations subsequently introduced by government. Essentially, “a country with a
the Finance Minister (Manmohan Singh) have population of over a billion has hardly more
clearly been successful. “Between 1991 and income tax payers than the UK. All the rest –
2004, India's economy grew by an average of 6% some 435 million people – work in what Indians
24
call the 'unorganized sector'”.

21. Kaliappa Kalirajan and Ulaganathan Sankar, 'Economic Reform and the Liberalisation of the Indian Economy',
MPG Books Ltd, 2003, page 41
22. Kaliappa Kalirajan and Ulaganathan Sankar, 'Economic Reform and the Liberalisation of the Indian Economy', MPG Books Ltd, 2003, page 4
23. Farndon, John, 'India Booms, The Breathtaking Development and Influence of Modern India', Virgin Books Ltd, 2007, page 15-16
24. Farndon, John, 'India Booms, The Breathtaking Development and Influence of Modern India', Virgin Books Ltd, 2007, page 18

19
 3.0 Overview

3.0.2 Post-Reform

“India… has shot straight into the third stage, with an economic boom that has relied almost entirely
on high-tech and service industries. It does have a range of manufacturing industries, but they are
remarkably small for a country of India's size and prosperity. There is no doubt that India's success
in the IT world has transformed the country. A milestone was passed in 2003 when the software
sector alone earned more money than the entire cost of the country's oil imports – the factor that had
brought the country to its financial knees in 1991. This meant that when the invasion of Iraq pushed
oil prices up again, India was able to ride out the difficulties almost with equanimity”

Economic Indicators between 2003 and 2008, and forecasts for 2009-10 are as below
Figure 1

ECONOMIC INDICATORS- INDIA 2003-2010

03-07 Average 2008 2009 2010

(forecast) (forecast)

Real GDP (% Growth) 8.9 7.4 4.9 6.5

Inflation (% year-end) 4.9 8.2 5.4 4.4
Fiscal Balance (% of GDP) -3.8 -6.0 7.0 -4.8
Exports (% Growth) 24.3 20.1 -8.0 10.6
Imports (% Growth) 30.7 33.1 -8.5 12.1
Current Account (% GDP) -0.3 -3.6 -4.0 -3.9
Reserves (mth of imports) 9.9 7.6 7.7 6.5
External Debt (% GDP) 16.0 14.0 14.6 13.8
Source: EDC Economics25

It is evident that 2009 is going to be a bad year in terms of Imports/Export Growth and GDP for India,
but this is consistent with the global financial crisis that has been playing out during this research
i.e. 2008-09. Looking at the data going back to 2003-07 however, GDP growth has been very
healthy average at 8.9% per annum real growth, and despite a rise in inflation in 2008, this is now
beginning to settle and is forecast to drop further.

25. Peter Whelan, 'India Economics', EDC Economics, May 2009, page 1 - http://www.edc.ca/english/docs/gindia_e.pdf

20

3.0.3 FDI in Retail
60+ years after independence
government is now starting to take a closer look
at liberalising its foreign investment policies.
In 2006 the Government has promoted limited
FDI in single-brand retailing
considered opening up further in a phased
system with emphasis on joint ventures with
domestic players, evident with the highly
controversial Wal-Mart joint venture with
Bharti. Studying other countries such as China,
where restrictions were initially imposed on the
locations and formats in which foreign retailers
could operate is also on the agenda of the
Indian Government.
The Indian media regularly discusses the issues
of FDI in Retailing. The Hindu Business Line's
opinion on the 'Great FDI in Indian Retail
debate', is that “organised retail as present
accounts for a mere 2% per cent of the total
market (2005) as against 20% in China and 40 %
in Thailand” and that “there is a growing
demand for modern retailing formats that offer
a clean and hygienic environment to shop in”.
This has created significant debate for allowing
FDI regulations to open up, although little has
changed for multi-brand retailing restrictions
to date.
26. http://www.hindubusinessline.com/2005/11/24/stories/2005112403131800.htm
27. Knight Frank – 'Market Review' Quarter 3 2006
3.0 Overview
India's Knight Frank revealed in their Market Review
(Q3 2006) that the move by the Indian
Government to allow FDI in real estate had been
an “opportune move” and although “multi-
and has brand retailing is still not allowed, FDI in single-
brand retailing has elicited heightened
27
interest”.
The government has created a specific Board to
deal with promotion of FDI in India and to be the
sole agency to handle matters related to FDI.
The 'Foreign Investment Promotion Board' (FIPB)
as it is known, is chaired by the Secretary
Industry (Department of Industrial Policy &
Promotion or DIPP) within the office of the Prime
Minister. Its key objectives are to promote FDI
in India with investment promotion activities
both domestically and internationally by
facilitating investment in the country via
international companies, NRIs (non-resident
Indians) and other forms of foreign investors.
The FIPB should review policy and puts
appropriate institutional arrangements in place
26
with transparent rules, guidelines, and
procedures for investment promotion and
approval.
21

3.0.3 FDI in Retail
The FIPB should meet every week, ensuring that
the cases that are pending are dealt with
quickly. It is there to ensure that the investors
applying with FDI proposals receive a response
on the Government's decision within six weeks.
FDI proposals deposited with the board's
secretariat should be put in front of the Board
within 15 days. The Administrative Ministries
must also make any comments either before
and/or in the FIPB meeting. The overall aim is
to provide a “transparent effective and investor
friendly single window providing clearance for
investment proposals.”28
28. http://finance.indiamart.com/investment_in_india/fipb.html
22
3.0 Overview
When looking specifically at FDI in retail, India
certainly has some 'political debates',
particularly regarding the potential risk of
displacing labour in the retail sector. Retail
employs a huge number of people in the
'unorganised' sector, the majority of which does
not have any skills. This has made retail a major
political issue as there is pressure on the
government to compensate the people who are
displaced and provide alternative employment
options.
 Chapter 4 - Policy Environment and
Growth of Organized Retail

4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment

Alongside the Foreign Investment Promotion
Board (FIPB) previously mentioned, there is also
the Investment Commission which was
established in December 2004 as part of the
Ministry of Finance so as to facilitate and
enhance investment in India.
recommendations on policy and procedure to
the Government and recommend projects that
should be fast tracked through the approval
process. They also assist in promoting India as
an investment destination.
The Investment Commission (2009) believes
the Foreign Investment regime in India as “one
of the most transparent and liberal… among
emerging and developing countries.
Differential treatment is limited to a few entry
rules, predominantly in some Services sectors.”29
Currently, an application must be made to either
They make the FIPB or the Secretariat for Industrial
Assistance (SIA) depending on which Approval
route is being used, providing the proposed
details of investment, the business plan,
financial and foreign company information, etc.
A declaration is also required to confirm whether
the applicant has previous collaborations or
trade mark agreements in India in the same
sector/field to which the application relates
(KPMG 2008)30

Foreign investment can be approved via one of two different routes:

a. Automatic Approval route requires no prior approval, and filing of the investment
details to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) post-facto is literally for data records only.
The automatic route is appropriate in any sector where there is no 'sector cap' i.e.
sectors where 100% foreign ownership is allowed and some other specified sectors,
for example <26% of an Insurance company.

b. FIPB Approval route is for proposals where the shareholding is intended to be

above a prescribed 'sector cap', or where the activity is one where FDI is currently
not allowed, or where it is mandatory for the application to be approved by the FIPB
(for example, sectors requiring an industrial licence.)
31
(Source: Investment Commission Website)

29. http://www.investmentcommission.in/policies_and_laws.htm
30. Investing in India, KPMG, 2008, page 32 - http://www.in.kpmg.com/TL_Files/Pictures/Investing.pdf
31. http://www.investmentcommission.in/policies_and_laws.htm

23
4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment
In terms of the Retail sector, foreign investment
is currently limited to 51% in single brand retail
stores and 100% FDI in wholesale cash and
carry. No multi-brand retailing is allowed.
Subject to these equity conditions, a foreign
investor can set up a registered company and
operate under the same rules and regulations
as an Indian company. Foreign investments are
freely repatriable, and are regulated under the
Foreign Exchange Management Act (1999)
(FEMA), administered by the Reserve Bank of
India's Exchange Control Department.
Ernst & Young (2007) in their report on behalf of
the India Brand Equity Foundation said:
“The Government is progressively undertaking
reforms and liberalising the retail sector;
thereby attracting significant
investments. The regulatory and supervisory
policies are being reshaped and reoriented to
meet the new challenges and opportunities in
this sector. To facilitate easier flow of Foreign
32. IBEF India, 'Retail Markets & Opportunities', A report by Ernst & Young for IBEF, 2007, Page 11 (www.ibef.in
Direct Investments (“FDI”) inflow, instead of
having to seek Foreign Investment Promotion
Board (“FIPB”) approval, FDI up to 100 per cent is
allowed under the automatic route for cash and
carry wholesale trading and export trading. FDI
up to 51 per cent is allowed, with prior
Government approval for retail trade in 'Single
Brand' products with the objective of attracting
investment, technology and global best
practices and catering to the demand for such
branded goods in India. This implies that
foreign companies can now sell goods sold
globally under a single brand, such as in the
case of Reebok, Nokia and Adidas. However,
retailing of multiple brands, even if the goods
are produced by the same manufacturer, is
presently not allowed. Relaxation of FDI
restrictions are being vigorously pursued by the
foreign
business and trade coalitions and are expected
to fall in place over the next 3-5 years.”32
24
4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment
In February 2009, the Department of Industry Policy & Promotion (DIPP) released a series of Press
Notes on changes relating to foreign investment. Those of particular interest to this research are:-

Press Note 2 - 'Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment’

Press Note 3 - 'Guidelines for transfer of ownership or control of Indian companies in
sectors with caps from resident Indian citizens to non-resident entities.
Press Note 4 – ‘Clarificatory guidelines on downstream investment by Indian Companies'.

The Press Notes do not appear to have instigated amendments to the Foreign Exchange
Management Act (FEMA), yet were supposed to come in to effect from the date of announcement, so
this is clearly going to cause confusion.

Press Note 2 (2009) introduces the concept of “ownership and control”33 for the first time. It
allows foreign-invested Indian companies to create and invest in downstream companies or
associated businesses without the original investment being counted. John Elliott (July 2009),
South Asia correspondent for the Financial Times comments that “this legitimises cascading
investments which have been used to bring foreign capital into sectors such as telecoms that
need heavy investment. FDI limits here are bypassed by progressively adding foreign investment
through tiers of subsidiary joint ventures so that, though official limits are exceeded overall, the
rules are not technically broken.”34

The government in a number of statements has said that areas such as multi-brand retailing (i.e.
where FDI is totally banned) will not be affected by these Press Note changes. It is however
questionable whether there is anything to stop a Joint Venture forming under a wholesale cash and
carry operation, and then setting up sub-companies in, for example multi-brand retailing, but
present this as an Indian owned and controlled business.

32. IBEF India, 'Retail Markets & Opportunities', A report by Ernst & Young for IBEF, 2007, Page 11 (www.ibef.in

25
4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment
As it stands today, there are a number of market Cash and carry is a particularly attractive option
entry methods available for retailers under for foreign investors as complete ownership
current FDI policy, for which the most common (100%) is allowed in this format. Several global
methods are:- players including Wal-Mart and Metro have
entered the Indian market through this method.
· Strategic License Agreements
On a more general note of regulation, the
(agreement with domestic player)
governing Act overseeing foreign exchange is
· Cash & Carry Wholesale trading (100%
the Foreign Exchange Management Act (1999).
ownership)
The objective of this Act is to amend and
· Joint Ventures
consolidate the laws in relation to foreign
· Franchising
exchange. Consideration also needs to be
· Distribution given to other policies and regulations that may
· Manufacturing affect FDI inflows in to India, for example labour
or company law. An example is the Payment of
Cash and carry is a particularly attractive option
Gratuity Act (1972) which provides for “gratuity
for foreign investors as complete ownership
inter alia to employees in factories, plantations,
(100%) is allowed in this format. Several global
shops, establishments, and mines in the event
players including Wal-Mart and Metro have
of superannuation, retirement, resignation,
entered the Indian market through this method.
death or total disablement due to accident or
disease.”35

33. Ministry of Commerce & Industry, 'Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment', Press Note No. 2 (2009 series), Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion,
February 2009, page 3 - http://siadipp.nic.in/policy/changes/pn2_2009.pdf
34. Elliott, John 'India's shaky FDI rules need clarification', FT.com, 9th July 2009 – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c92b432a-6c6a-11de-a6e6-00144feabdc0.html
35. KPMG, Investing in India, 2008, page 32 - http://www.in.kpmg.com/TL_Files/Pictures/Investing.pdf

26
4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment
KPMG (2008)36 highlight just some of the key legislation that could have a potential impact
on foreign investors setting up in India, as per below:

· Payment of Bonus Act 1965

· Minimum Wages Act 1948
· Shops & Establishment Act
· Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970
· Industrial Disputes Act 1947
· Workman's Compensation Act
· Profession Tax
· Maternity Benefit Act 1961
· Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952
· The Employees State Insurance Act 1948
· Goods & Services Tax (GST) (Proposed for July 2010)

The India Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF) in state governments, with the Governments
2007 has also said that “The Government is benefiting from the access to impressive
expected to take a calibrated approach in land revenues from land sales and tax collection
and rent reforms to improve the real estate from retail developments. Solutions to
regulatory environment and facilitate easy problems related to the lease rentals and pro-
access to retail space for international tenancy laws, which significantly deter
investors. The Government is releasing large international investors, are being pursued by
tracts of unused land for retail development in the Government, with initiatives like Special
the Mumbai and National Capital Regions Economic Zones (SEZs), allotment of
37
(NCRs). This is soon to be followed by other Government controlled land etc.”

36. Investing in India, KPMG, 2008, page 79 - http://www.in.kpmg.com/TL_Files/Pictures/Investing.pdf

37. IBEF !India, Retail Markets & Opportunities, A report by Ernst & Young for IBEF, 2007, Page 12 (www.ibef.in)

27
4.1 Policy and Regulatory Environment
To provide confidence to investors and show
commitment to a SEZ policy regime that is
stable and focused on increasing economic
activity and employment through the setting up
of SEZs, a comprehensive draft SEZ Bill was
prepared after extensive debate with
stakeholders. The Special Economic Zones Act,
2005, was passed by Parliament in May 2005
and came into effect on the 10th February 2006,
providing for a more streamline and simplified
set of procedures and for 'one-stop' clearance
on matters relating to central as well as state
governments.
The main objectives of the SEZ Act are:
· generation of additional economic activity
· promotion of exports of goods and services
· promotion of investment from domestic &
foreign sources
· creation of employment opportunities
development of infrastructure facilities
28
Despite the current policy and regulatory
environment not being 'perfect' for foreign
investors, there are clearly moves towards
improving the current position and facilitating
FDI inflows without having a detrimental impact
on various sectors of the economy.
The current policy is trying to encourage Joint
Ventures in multi-brand retailing so as to boost
the domestic retailer's growth in this area.
However, there is also the risk that some
foreign retailers will not be interested in
investing unless they have 100% ownership and
that the current policy will prevent them from
choosing India as an FDI in Retail destination.
In reality, this may present itself as 'back-door'
multi-brand retailing through the use of the
aforementioned 'cascading' sub-companies of
Joint Ventures.
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing
Chaze (2006) looked at 'unorganized and organized’ sectors in India, in the context of retailing. He
spoke of how the organized retailing sector was beginning to grow rapidly.

He states that “organized retailing (versus the

traditional Indian fare of stand-alone retail or
department stores) has to be one of the most
exciting growth industries in India today, with
branded stores and malls thus far covering a
38
miniscule 2% of the total market.”

The Figure below shows how significant retail is to the Indian economy, contributing 39% of GDP, and
yet organized retailing is still in an under-developed early stage at only 6% of total market (2005)
when compared to other countries. It is clear from this data that India has a significantly lower
percentage of organized retailing compared to other developing markets such as China with 20% of
organized retail penetration, and Brazil with 75%. When compared to their respective retail sector
contributions to GDP, India is higher at 39% than China and Brazil.

Retail is a significant contributor to india’s GDP;

however organized retail plays only a small role in that

Although retail is a significant contributor ... organized retailing is still at a very

to India’s Economy ... nascent stage in India
Retail % Contribution to GDP (Yr 2005) Organized Retail Penetration (%)

55 85
75
39
32
22 23
17 32
22 20

USA Brazil South Vietnam China India USA Brazil South Vietnam China India
Africa Africa

39
Source: Confederation of Indian Industry & AT Kearney Report (2006)

38. Chaze, Aaron, India, An Investor's Guide to the Next Economic Superpower, John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd, 2006, page 23
39. CII / AT Kearney, Retail In India: Getting Organized to Drive Growth', November 2006, page 5

29
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing
Vietnam on the other hand is the only country in this figure with a higher GDP contribution at
55% (compared to India at 39%) as well as having a higher percentage of organized retail
penetration at 22% (compared to 6% in India).
Food and Beverages vertical constitutes the largest percentage share of the revenue at 74.41%,
and yet only has 'organized' penetration of 0.98%, so is likely to be a target sector for foreign
retailers. Figure 3 below shows the revenue and share of verticals, as well as the penetration of
organized retail:

Figure 3

Vertical Value (US$ millions) Share of Total Organised Retail

Revenue (%) Penetration (%)
Food & Beverages 231,951 74.41 0.98
Clothing & Textile 29,024 9.31 16.39
Consumer Durables 15,171 4.87 17.04
Home Décor 9,463 3.04 8.76
Jewellery & Watches 13,390 4.30 6.19
Beauty Care 6,854 2.20 3.56
Footwear 3,268 1.05 32.84
Books, Music & Gifts 2,610 0.84 13.08
40
Source: IBEF India

The Indian consumer behavior of preferring proximity to retail formats is also particularly
pronounced in the food & beverages sector, with food, grocery and allied products largely
sourced from the local stores or hand cart vendors very close to home.

40. IBEF India, Retail Markets & Opportunities, A report by Ernst & Young for IBEF, 2007, Page 75-76 (www.ibef.in)

30
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing
Ernst & Young (2007) have said that “prevalence “Modern/Organised retailing is growing at an
of traditional retailing is highly pronounced in aggressive pace in urban India, fueled by
small towns and cities with primary presence of bourgeoning economic activity. Organized
neighborhood 'kirana' stores, push-cart retail revenues are expected to increase from an
vendors, 'melas' and 'mandis'. Organized estimated US$ 12.9 billion per annum in 2005-
formats are only in the initial stages of adoption 06 to more than US$ 43 billion by 2009-10. The
in these regions. Leading retail players in the sector is predicted to grow by 400 per cent, in
industry are beginning to explore these value terms, by 2007-08. A large number of
markets and the rural consumers are slowly domestic and international players are setting
beginning to embrace the newer organized up base and expanding their business with
retail formats. “ With such a high level of newer organized retail formats and intense
42
unorganized retail employment in the country, competition driving innovation in formats.”
it is understandable that the rapid growth of
organized retailing naturally causes some Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), one of the
concern for smaller industry and traditional largest domestic organized retailers in India,
retailers. It does however seem inevitable that has set up a subsidiary of RIL called Reliance
organized retail will continue to see strong Retail Limited (RRL) to drive forward the groups
growth in India as rural (and urban) consumers growth in the organized retail sector, with its
begin to accept and adapt to new and modern 'vision' to “generate inclusive growth and
41
retailing formats. prosperity for farmers, vendor partners, small
shopkeepers and consumers.”43

42. IBEF India, Retail Markets & Opportunities, A report by Ernst & Young for IBEF, 2007, Page 5 (www.ibef.in)
43. RIL Online http://www.ril.com/html/business/business_retail.html

31
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing
According to RRL (2009)44, 27% of global GDP is
attributed to retail, and in various developing
markets organized retail contributes typically
anywhere between 20% and 55% of GDP.
Placing the Indian retail
approximately $300 billion, with a growth rate
of 13% per year, RRL point out that presently,
although organized retailing
approximately 5%, this is likely to grow to 10%
by 2011. Therefore, RRL have begun an
implementation plan to create a high spec state
of the art retail infrastructure, to include a
strategy for opening multi-format stores such
as convenience, hypermarket, speciality and
wholesale stores.
Allowing FDI 100% in retailing would no doubt
significantly accelerate this growth. In fact,
Reliance in recognising that “strategic alliances
are going to be a key driver to its retail business,
in financial year 2007-08, established key joint
ventures with international partners in apparel
(clothing), optical and office product
businesses. Further, RRL will continue to seek
synergistic opportunities with other
45
international players as well.”
market at
The growth of consumerism in India is one of
the key drivers fuelling the organised retail
is only growth. Pankaj Gupta (2006)46 highlights
several demographic trends that are factors in
the growth of organized retailing. India is, for
example, experiencing rapid income growth so
consumers have a greater ability to spend.
There is growing urbanization and this urban
population has both a higher propensity to
spend, and a desire for convenience. India also
has a growing 'young' population which has
both the willingness and attitude to spend.
Gupta also states that there is a trend for Indian
consumers tending to 'buy now, save later' i.e.
consumers are prepared to borrow money for
today's consumption.

It seems fairly safe to assume that even without FDI, the organized retail sector in India is going to
grow rapidly, and this is going to have some effect on the traditional unorganized retailers.

44. RIL Online http://www.ril.com/html/business/business_retail.html

45. http://www.ril.com/html/business/business_retail.html
46. Pankaj Gupta, Organised Retail in India, The Next Growth Frontier, Tata Strategic Management, June 2006, page 2,
(http://www.tsmg.com/download/article/TSMG_Tata_Review-June_2006.pdf)

32
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing
Management consultant Rama Bijapurkar says Sajjan Jindal said that “providing industry status
“the poorest fifth live a hand-to-mouth is the first basic step needed for reforming the
existence and are insignificant as consumers. Indian retailing sector.”48
The next fifth, aspirants, acquire the most basic
consumer durables – bicycles, fans and radios – ASSOCHAM believe that the advantages of
and learn to aspire for more. The third group, having an industry status are that it will allow a
climbers, is hooked, but find that their desires better “focus on retailing development, fiscal
far outrun their income, so they buy the incentives, and availability of organized
cheapest goods. The fourth group, whom she financing and establishment of insurance
49
calls the consuming class… is of inveterate norms.” They feel the development of the
buyers; they weigh the price against what they retail sector can take place at a faster pace if
get for it. The top fifth are the rich; they buy the there is a comprehensive legislation enacted.
47
best without looking at the price.” The legislation should be “simple and have a
futuristic approach. It should take into
The Associated Chambers of Commerce and consideration the developments that are taking
Industry of India (ASSOCHAM) are cited in a place in this arena worldwide. The legislation
news-article at www.dare.co.in (an Indian should provide broad parameters within which
platform for entrepreneurs and business the retail sector should operate and day–to-day
owners), as supporting a proposal to give the functioning and other modalities should be
retail sector formal 'industry status'. In a note prescribed in the Rules. The underlying idea is
by the Ministries of Commerce & Industry and to have minimum modifications in the Act in the
50
Consumer Affairs, the Chamber President, future.”

47. Kattuman, Paul A, recorded discussion - Judge Business School University of Cambridge, 23 September, 9.55am.
48. http://www.dare.co.in/news/others/assocham-demand-industry-status-for-retail-sector.htm
49. http://www.dare.co.in/news/others/assocham-demand-industry-status-for-retail-sector.htm
50. http://www.dare.co.in/news/others/assocham-demand-industry-status-for-retail-sector.htm

33
4.2 Growth in 'Organized’ Retailing
For retail operations under current Rules, need to apply for and obtain a series of licenses and
permits. These range from basic trading licenses and product specific licenses, to pollution
clearance, amongst others. Every retail outlet is required to obtain these, even if it is a part of a
chain. “These are irritants, [and] add time and cost to the process of establishing a retail chain”51

Kattuman (2009), whilst citing Rama's view on consumption said the following:

“Indians can be divided into a number of generations; those born before independence, the
product of post-independence socialist India, and those who grew up after liberalization. Each
has a different mind set and approach to consumption. As time passes, each generation will pass
into history, and new generations will arise. Their changing outlook has an influence on
consumption patterns.”

51. http://www.dare.co.in/news/others/assocham-demand-industry-status-for-retail-sector.htm

34
 Chapter 5 - Arguments for and
against FDI in Retailing

5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing

There are many who argue that FDI in retailing
will be of benefit to India, and discussions are
often seen in the Indian media. In fact, some
even argue that if FDI in retail is not allowed, it
could be harmful to India's retail sector.
Tripathi (2009) the Director of Silk Hut (a mid-
sized silk garment retailer in Hyderabad), has
said "Industry experts believed that the
technical edge offered by foreign companies is
crucial for the survival of domestic retail
52
companies in the [current] downturn.”
Tripathi (2009) feels that it is essential that FDI
be allowed in the retail sector at 100% equity,
because this is likely to encourage domestic
investment into the sector too, and generate
further employment opportunities. In addition
to this, he commented that during the
economic downturn that is currently being
experienced, most of the retail industry players,
both large and small, felt that it would be good
to boost the economy by facilitating higher FDI
inflows.
These arguments for improvements in
technology and increases in FDI inflows to
boost economic growth are supported by other
proponents of FDI in retailing. Singh & Banga
(2008) undertook a research paper on the
emergence & prospects of FDI in India's
retailing, and highlighted that despite the
developments in the industry in recent years
and the large contribution to India's economy,
"retailing continues to be the least evolved
industries and the growth of organised retailing
in India has been much slower as compared to
the rest of the world… One important reason for
this is that retailing is one of the few sectors
53
where FDI is not allowed.”

52. Tripathi, Karthik, Retailing360, Guest Column, 27th April 2009, page 1 -
http://www.retailing360.com/article/8/2009062420090624193427218739345f/Barring-foreign-players-will-hurt-Indian-retailersKarthik-Tripathi-Silk-Hut.html
53. Singh & Banga (2008), RetailDude.com, Guest Paper, page 2 – http://bimtech-retail.com/downloads/FDI_RetailDude.pdf

35
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing
Singh & Banga (2008) identify seven key
reasons for opening up the retail sector to FDI.
Firstly, they believe that the large global retail
players have a far more advanced knowledge of
management, particularly in inventory
management and merchandising and are far
more productive and efficient, utilizing new
technologies to their advantage. Secondly,
they argue that the foreign 'low-cost' big
players will adopt an integrated supply chain
management system which in turn should help
to lower the price of products, benefitting
consumers. Thirdly, Singh & Banga believe that
FDI will ensure that products are good quality
and that customer services improve, providing
a better shopping 'experience'. Fourthly, it will
encourage and promote the links between
domestic/local suppliers, manufacturers and
agricultural traders to global markets. Quality
and safety standards of domestics will be
improved by this as only those who meet strict
standards are likely to be selected. It will also
help in providing a profitable and reliable
market for the domestic local players. Singh &
Banga's fifth argument was that the foreign
retailers would begin to spread their operations
in India, and as this happened domestic players
36
would develop their supply chain, create new
strategies and improve operations to
counteract the competition from foreign
players, and this would inevitably encourage
investment and employment in supply chain
and back-end sectors. Joint Ventures between
domestic 'organized' retailers and foreign
players (such as Wal-mart & Bharti) would also
help to ease the capital constraints of the
domestics. Finally, it was highlighted that the
development of new retail formats and sector
modernization in general would be brought
around by FDI.
Singh & Banga (2008) concluded from their
research that it was evident that "ever growing
urban and rural markets in India represent an
unprecedented and vast unexplored
opportunity for retailing to all types of formats.
Initially there may be certain reservations and
apprehensions in allowing global players in
India's retailing, but if they are allowed in a
phased manner on the basis of a well conceived
and chalked out policy, they are likely to lead to
more investment in organized retailing and
allied sectors.”
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing
With the above said, their research paper also advised that a number of points needed to be kept into
consideration when opening up FDI:

1. The opening up of FDI should be phased, over a 5-10 year time frame so as to allow time for
domestic retailers to adjust.
2. FDI in multi-brand retailing should be kept restricted in the near future, as Indian retailers
would not be able to face this competition immediately.
3. It is not currently desirable for FDI to be above 51%, even in single brand retailing. This will allow
checking and control of foreign retailer's business operations, and will help to protect the
interests of domestic retailers. However, the sector cap (equity limit) could be increased in due
course as it has been in the telecom, banking and insurance markets.
4. Certain products that are sensitive should not be allowed, for example, arms/ammunition and
military equipment. The excluded products should be expressly stated in policy.
5. There should be restricted zones imposed by the government for the purposes of city planning.
E.g. Supermarkets/Hypermarkets should be kept away from the city centers to protect the
unorganized and small retailers who operate in these areas.

One of the most publicized and well known
studies was produced by the Indian Council for
Research on International Economic Relations
(ICRIER) in association with the Academic
Foundation, who were asked by the Department
of Consumer Affairs and the Government of
India to undertake a research project in to this
area of study, for which their findings were
published in 2005 so as to encourage the
debate of this important issue, and to enable
the Government to begin drawing up key policy
decisions.
The ICRIER (2005) study revealed that many of
those in favor of FDI believed that the opening
up of the retail sector would be of benefit to
India in terms of investment inflow, technical
knowledge and skills. Those in favor argued
that organized retailing requires heavy
investment if it is to expand rapidly, and would
require supply chain set-up and the
introduction of information technology.

37
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing

“FDI would ease the capital constraint and foreign players would bring in best management
practices that can be replicated by the domestic players. They would invest in supply chain, source
products from India and provide a platform to domestic manufacturers to export their products in
international markets through these retailers.”

During the study by ICRIER (2005), groups of
traders in the unorganized retail sector who had
seen organized retailers locate in close
proximity to them, were asked questions to find
out if they had been adversely affected, and
whether they had been displaced by the
organized retailers' presence. According to the
results, “65% of unorganized players felt that
the growth of organized retailing has no major
impact on their business.
that they initially suffered some losses but had
changed their business strategies to face the
competition. The remaining 10% faced losses
but have not changed their business practices.
None of the unorganized players had to close
down their operations.” 54
The main findings of the ICRIER study revealed
that FDI in retailing led to:
1. Increased speed of development in modern
formats
2. Improved productivity and efficiency of the
retail sector
3. Enhanced sourcing
4. Improved quality of employment – no
Another 25% said negative impact on employment if the
economy is growing.
5. Encouraged investment in supply chain
6. Led to integration of suppliers, logistic
service and retailers – reduction in the
number of intermediaries
7. Linked local suppliers, farmers,
manufactures to global markets
8. Low cost global retailers likely to lower
prices
9. Consumers are assured of product quality,
better service & shopping experience.

54. Mukherjee & Patel, FDI in Retail Sector India, Academic Foundation in association with ICRIER, 2005, page 120

38
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing
The ICRIER (2005) study also reported that Although some of the above arguments
those in favour of FDI argued that the reality of supports FDI being introduced more formally to
the situation is that foreign retailers are already increase transparency to the regulations, the
operating in India due to the loop holes in debate becomes even more complex and
current policy and regulation, and that if FDI relevant when you consider the recent changes
was opened up, this would help to improve the by the Government in the series of Press Notes
transparency of the regulatory system. released in February 2009 (as discussed in
Chapter 3.1 Policy & Regulatory Environment).
55
This argument is supported by Dey (2007) , of The Press Notes from Elliott's (2009) point of
57
the Research Unit for Political Economy (RUPE). view "legitimise cascading investments.” It is
Although FDI is restricted, Dey points out that important that regulations are made clear so
the Government of India has taken a much more that the possibility of foreign retailers using
liberal approach to wholesale, commission these grey areas or loop holes to set up
agent services and franchising and this has cascading businesses dressed up as Indian
resulted in many foreign retailers having controlled and owned companies is eliminated.
already set up operations through a number of In our opinion this defeats the whole object of
different routes. For example, Pottery Barn, having FDI restrictions in place in the retail
Ralph Lauren and Gap have all made India a key sector, and makes the entry of foreign retailers
sourcing hub. Wal-Mart, one of the world's harder to control and monitor.
largest retailers set up a global sourcing
operation in Bangalore in 2002, and at the end In respect of single-brand retailing which is
of 2006, it entered a Joint Venture with the well allowed up to 51% equity, Khatore and Parekh
known Indian corporation Bharti. "For the time (2009) point out that "several major foreign
being, Bharti is to own the chain of front-end single-brand retailers have already established
retail stores, while the two firms will have an their presence in India through the permissible
equal share in a firm that will engage in franchise route. Thus, the policy of not
wholesale, logistics, supply chain and sourcing allowing 100% investment appears
activities. This is seen as a preliminary step by desynchronised, as outflow of funds from India
Wal-Mart pending the removal of all restrictions in the form of franchise payments is permitted
56
on FDI in retail trade.” but inflow of foreign investments is
58
restricted.”

55. Dey, Dipankur, 'FDI in India's Retail Trade: Some Additional Issues', Aspects of India's economy No. 43, July 2007, page 1 – http://rupe-india.org/43/retail.html
56. Dey, Dipankur, 'FDI in India's Retail Trade: Some Additional Issues', Aspects of India's economy No. 43, July 2007, page 1 – http://rupe-india.org/43/retail.html
57. Elliott, John 'India's shaky FDI rules need clarification', FT.com, 9th July 2009 – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c92b432a-6c6a-11de-a6e6-00144feabdc0.html
58. Khatore, P & Parekh P, 'Wholesale FDI in Retail', The Hindu Business Line, 4th June 2009, page 1 –
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2009/06/04/stories/2009060450260900.htm

39
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing
Khatore and Parekh (2009) also argue that the monopoly rents will begin to accrue and bad
growth projection that has been forecast for the habits will get entrenched and it will then be
Indian retail sector may not be achievable if the more difficult to open the sector. Domestic
government does not act quickly in opening up players have the best locations anyway and a
59
single-brand and multi-brand retail sectors. clear head start.”

Kumar (2006) argued that FDI in retail improves
growth prospects. In an article in The Economic
Times (August 2006) Kumar stated that there
are predominantly 3 arguments against
allowing FDI in the retail sector. The first was
that it could hinder or prevent the domestic
organized retailers from growing. Secondly, it
would result in small retail stores closing and
unemployment growing, and thirdly, that it
would disrupt the social community and the
given way of life.
Kumar (2006) counters
arguments individually, retorting that the first
argument is out-of-date, because domestic
players such as Reliance, Tata and various other
large organized retailers have already grown
and matured and that "these corporates don't
need protection…Actually, if these infants are
protected any longer they have good chances of
becoming delinquent adults. Soon enough,
The second argument is also not substantiated,
as Kumar argues that "liberalization of retail
raises overall economic welfare and does not
result in loss of employment. Some
restructuring will take place but local markets
will not close down. Both can coexist as they
fulfil different needs and serve different
60
clientele.”
The third argument on the disruption of social
community and the given way of life has a
stronger case. Kumar acknowledges that
each of these shopping centers & malls could potentially
result in "greater urban anonymity and a
complete breakdown of the bazaar culture and
the disappearance of the 'down town' space that
has its own charm. But, in France, Germany the
Nordic countries and also other parts of Europe,
experience has shown that local communities
can thrive if they are empowered and involved in
61
urban planning.”

59. Kumar, Rajiv, 'Should India allow FDI in Retail?', The Economic Times, 11th August 2006, page 1 –
http://economictimes/indiatimes.com/Opinion/Should-India-allow-FDI-in-retail/articleshow/1882764.cms
60. Kumar, Rajiv, 'Should India allow FDI in Retail?', The Economic Times, 11th August 2006, page 1 –
http://economictimes/indiatimes.com/Opinion/Should-India-allow-FDI-in-retail/articleshow/1882764.cms
61. Kumar, Rajiv, 'Should India allow FDI in Retail?', The Economic Times, 11th August 2006, page 1 –
http://economictimes/indiatimes.com/Opinion/Should-India-allow-FDI-in-retail/articleshow/1882764.cms

40
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing
Kumar (2006) concludes that FDI in retail will
improve prospects of growth, will not harm
equity and will ensure that monopoly rents are
not encouraged, and therefore should be
opened up immediately.
Real estate consultant CB Richard Ellis also
believe that the government needs to open up
FDI in retail so as to bring in more investment
and to help promote competition in the sector
that has been hit hard by the current economic
slowdown. “The existing FDI rules are a
constraint. There is need to open up the sector a
bit more as it will facilitate fresh infusion of
62
funds and also promote competition,”
Chairman of CB Richard Ellis's South Asia office.
Mehta (2007) of the Birla Institute of
Management Technology in giving an overview
of the Indian retail market implied that
regardless of the risks to traditional retailers
such as the 'mom and pop' stores, FDI would
still bring significant benefits to the Indian
consumer and give them value for money. "The
standard of living of the people will increase
and they will have a better lifestyle which will
result in the development of the economy as a
63
whole.”
When looking at FDI from a general point of
view, removed from the constraints of the retail
sector focus of this report, it could be argued
that FDI, if 'effective', will develop human
capital. Subbarao (2008) discusses this in a
research paper on FDI and Human Capital
said Development, saying that "effective FDI
indulges in enhancement of human capital of
64
the country.” By 'effective' FDI, Subbarao
means investment that encourages the
development of a country that fosters the
development of each resident of the country.

62. Indian Realty News, ' Relax Norms on Foreign Direct Investment to Ease Fresh Infusion into Retail', 12th October 2009 -
http://www.indianrealtynews.com/retail-market/relax-norms-on-foreign-direct-investment-to-ease-fresh-infusion-into-retail.html
63. Mehta, Geetu, 'Indian Retail Overview' Birla Institute of Management Technology, 2007, page 2 – http://bimtech-retail.com/article2.html
64. Subbarao, P Srinivas, 'FDI and Human Capital Development', Indian Institute of Management, February 2008, page 2

41
5.1 Arguments for FDI in Retailing
Subbarao (2008) also talks of other potential
benefits to host countries, including the
generation of employment,
productivity, skills & technology transfer,
improved infrastructure, increased incomes,
enhanced exports, and contribution to the
long-term development
economies. There is also the advantage to the
Government of additional taxes. Taxes that are
generated from the entry of foreign investors in
a host country can be used by the Government
to re-invest in human capital development.
Even without taxes, a United
Conference on Trade and Development
(UNCTAD) report in 1994 (cited by Subbarao
(2008)) reported that foreign multi-national
investors' "demand for highly trained graduates
manifests itself in the form of financial support,
particularly to business schools.”
it is likely that foreign retail investors will look
to invest in human capital development as well
as provide additional tax streams.
said, Subbarao acknowledges that different
countries have had different experiences with
regards to whether FDI has lead to the
enhancement of human capital.
raising of
The Financial Express (anonymous author,
2005) when discussing the arguments of those
who are against FDI, said that there are no
of developing restrictions for Indian large corporates to enter
into retail. Many domestic players have huge
expansion plans and the ability to invest billions
of dollars themselves. What is the difference
between these domestic players expanding, or
foreign investors joining and expanding in the
Nations Indian market?
The Financial Express (2005) believed it could
also be argued that organised retailing would
have little detrimental effect on retailers if
comparison is drawn from the impact of stores
65
Therefore, like Wal-Mart on small US retailers. Retail sales
increased substantially overall; and although
retail sales were adversely affected in areas
With this such as clothing & groceries, there was an
increase in sales of general merchandise, home
furnishing, and food and drink.

“India's retail sector is already undergoing a change propelled by evolving consumer demand and
lifestyles, urban chaos and shortage of retail space, integration of markets, a need for revamping
logistics, and above all, global competition. FDI may hasten this change, and even benefit SMEs. It
would be better if FDI is allowed in phases, giving time for policy adjustments, and with appropriate
riders on procurement to ensure that small producers gain from it. The debate must shift into the
realm of 'how' instead of 'why'.”

65. Subbarao, P Srinivas, 'FDI and Human Capital Development', Indian Institute of Management, February 2008, page 7

42
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
When researching the justifications 'against' FDI companies in India.”67 Other studies by N.
in India's retail sector, it should be recognised Kumar (1990), S Kumar (1996), Myneni (2000)
that there have been many studies that have and Debroy (1996) were all identified by Nayak
looked at the strengths and weaknesses of (2008) as showing positive benefits to the
allowing FDI in developing countries in general, domestic companies and country as a whole.
of which several of these have focused on India.
Amar Nayak (2008) in his literature on multi- To the contrary, “a number of highly compelling
nationals in India discussed some of these studies show that FDI has not been beneficial to
studies to try to understand the impact of FDI on host countries. Nair-Reichert and Weinhold
host countries. It was evident that the (2001) studied the impact of FDI on over 24
literature revealed a heterogeneous (varied) countries in different stages of development
effect on host countries, and whilst “some and found that FDI had a heterogeneous
studies show that FDI has benefited a host impact. Country specific analyses of host
country, many other studies show that they countries show that FDI has not helped them in
68
have either had a negative impact or no impact meeting their national objectives.” (Cited by
66
on host countries.” Nayak (2008)

Nayak (2008) when discussing the literature
that focused on India, pointed out that there
were apparent positive and negative effects
from FDI. For example, “Johri (1983), by
studying the business strategies of foreign
multinational companies in the drug and
pharmaceutical industry, showed that domestic
companies benefited greatly
investments of foreign pharmaceutical
Chakraborty and Basu (2002) had concluded
from research that the Indian Government's
trade liberalization policy had initially made a
positive impact, but as a whole had tended to
cause labour displacement. In fact, Nayak
(2002, 2004, 2005) had concluded “FDI on the
whole in India has neither been effective for
by the India nor for the foreign companies in India.”
(Cited by Nayak (2008)69

66. Amar K.J.R. Nayak, 'Multinationals in India, FDI and Complementation Strategy in a Developing Country', Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, page 13
67. Amar K.J.R. Nayak, Multinationals in India, FDI and Complementation Strategy in a Developing Country, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, page 13
68. Amar K.J.R. Nayak, Multinationals in India, FDI and Complementation Strategy in a Developing Country, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, page 13
69. Amar K.J.R. Nayak, Multinationals in India, FDI and Complementation Strategy in a Developing Country, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, page 15

43
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
Abrol (2005), the President of the Bombay Small
Scale Industries Association is cited by the
Financial Express website as having said
“various ministers of the present government
are proposing FDI in retail. We believe
multinational retail and
International Monetary Fund lobbies and some
self-serving bureaucrats are supporting it. This
proposal will create multiple East India
Companies in our country and affect livelihoods
of 1.2 crore (12 million) small retailers. Isn't the
70
proposal anti- national?”
Abrol is not alone in this view. There have been
several parties who have spoken out strongly
against FDI in Retail. The organisation 'India
FDI Watch' argues why India should be kept
Independent, and the Center for Policy
Alternatives Society (CPAS), a privately funded
think tank focused on the study and review of
public policy in India, have produced a series of
reports on the problems with FDI in Retail. The
first in 2003, then in 2006, and a third in 2007.
All have compelling arguments that require
further consideration.
70. Financial Express, Is FDI in Retail a Death Knell for SMEs', 27th May 2005 – http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Is-FDI-in-retail-a-death-knell-for-SMEs/138090/1
Mohan Guruswamy, Chairman of CPAS in New
Delhi was the former Advisor to the Finance
Minister, and a Harvard graduate. Along with
several colleagues (K Sharma, J P Mohanty and
Thomas J Korah) he produced a document titled
World Bank- 'FDI in India's Retail Sector, More Bad than
Good?' Guruswamy et al (2003) highlighted that
unorganised retailing accounted for
approximately 98% (in 2003) of total trade, with
organised retailing only having a share of 2% of
the market. The size of the retail market is very
hard to gauge, but estimates have placed it at
around Rs 4,00,000 crores (US$ 86,021.50
million) which was forecast at the time to
double by 2005. They acknowledged that
domestic retail businesses that were 'corporate'
owned, were only a small amount of the total
market, but were growing at a rate of 40%.
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce
and Industry (FICCI) in 2003 estimated total
retail business to be 44% of GDP, and food sales
made up 63% of total retail sales. With food
retail trade being a significantly large segment
of India's GDP, and because of its huge
employment potential, Guruswamy felt it
deserved special attention.
44
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
Guruswamy et al's (2003) first note was that
even if FDI was not opened up, the growth of the
domestic 'organised sector' alone would result
in efficiency improvements and an increase in
food retail sales activity, which would have a
trickle down effect on employment and
economic activity in rural locations. This raised
the question of whether FDI was necessary at all
in this sector, if there is enough domestic
capital being injected in to the retail sector. The
furious growth of the domestic corporate
retailers would bring about enough investment.

Guruswamy et al (2003) talked of retail as a 'Forced Employment' sector in India. They argued
that one of the main reasons behind the growth of retail and its fragmented nature was that

Retailing was “probably the primary form of disguised unemployment/underemployment in the

country. Given the already over-crowded agriculture sector, and the stagnating manufacturing
sector, and the hard nature and relatively low wages of jobs in both, many millions [of] Indians are
virtually forced into the services sector. Here, given the lack of opportunities, it is almost a natural
decision for an individual to set up a small shop or store… and thus, a retailer is born, seemingly
out of circumstance rather than choice.”

This would explain why India is so highly fragmented with estimates at the time of the above report
suggesting in the region of 11 million outlets with only 4% of them being larger than 500 square feet
in size. But unemployment is high and many of the unemployed people turn to very informal
retailing to try and make some kind of living, with limited alternative employment opportunities.

45
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
Dey (2007) recognized this problem also, and retail sector… Those displaced as a result of FDI
stated that "the retail sector [in India] acts as an in retail may not show up as an increase in
important shock absorber for the present social visible unemployment”72
system.”71 When for example, a factory closes,
or a peasant gets evicted from their land, or the Interestingly, Guruswamy et al (2003)
stagnant manufacturing industry fails to soak discussed a particular foreign retailer who has
up new entrants to the job market, then the subsequently entered the Indian market in 'cash
retail sector manages to absorb them all. & carry' wholesale (Wal-mart) arguing that if
Skilled laborers end up as street hawkers, and they were to enter India, they could use
educated youth turn to selling newspapers. A predatory strategies to force out smaller
better off unemployed person might start competition and that this would create
telephone services and retail telecom cards. unemployment in the millions.
"Thus, after agriculture, the incidence of under-
employment is probably highest in the Indian

It was calculated that on the basis that India had 35 towns with over 1 million people in each, and if
Wal-mart opened an average store in each city and they performed as well as an average Wal-mart
store employing just over 10,000 employees only, then by extrapolating the turnover and no. of
employees alongside the average trend, it would be the equivalent of 432,000 people being
displaced. The report expanded on this theory further arguing that if FDI retailers were to acquire
say 20% of retail trade, this would equate to Rs. 800 billion of turnover, which would lead to the
employment of just 43,540 people, but would displace approximately 8 million people employed
in the unorganised retail sector.

71. Dey, Dipankur, 'FDI in India's Retail Trade: Some Additional Issues', Aspects of India's economy No. 43, July 2007, page 1 – http://rupe-india.org/43/retail.html
72. Dey, Dipankur, 'FDI in India's Retail Trade: Some Additional Issues', Aspects of India's economy No. 43, July 2007, page 2 – http://rupe-india.org/43/retail.html

46
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
Centre for Policy Alternatives' (CPAS) first report by as detailed above, acknowledges that there are
many good things that could come from FDI, and they have supported FDI in other areas where they
feel the evidence suggests that it will benefit and grow the economy. For the retail sector, CPAS
make a number of recommendations for issues that should be addressed before considering the
opening up of the retail sector to foreigners. These recommendations are summarised below:

1. Bank Finance – The government should create suitable lending policies so as to assist
domestic organized and unorganized retailers to grow and improve their efficiency. These
policies should encourage those in the unorganized sector to migrate to the organized sector.
2. National Commission – A National Commission should be set up to carry out research in to
the retail sector to help create policies that will support the sector if and when FDI arrives.
3. Conditions – Conditions with regards to sourcing of farm produce, domestically
manufactured merchandise and imported goods should be applied to large foreign retail
companies. The conditions should encourage the sourcing of goods from India's domestic
market.
4. Timescale / Safeguards – The opening up of the retail sector should be slow and gradual so
as to allow for the displacement of labor to be analyzed and policies amended where
appropriate, with social safeguards in place. Ensure high entry costs for foreign retailers and
implement regulations so that the retailer cannot use predatory tactics with their pricing to
gain market share aggressively.
5. Manufacturing Sector – In order to cope with the labor displacement, CPAS strongly suggest
that the manufacturing sector must be improved, in the belief that this will offer some
compensation for the displaced labor from the retail industry.
6. Co-operative Stores – They recommend that the government should encourage co-operative
stores so as to source and stock consumer goods/commodities from the small producers, in
order to address the two problems of limited promotion and marketing ability, as well as
assisting market penetration.
7. Agricultural Perishable Produce Commission (APPC) – A Commission to ensure that
procurement costs are fair for farmers of perishable commodities.

47
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
8. Food Retail Sector
a. Training to provide skills in transport, handling, storing, sorting, grading, hygiene,
refrigeration equipment maintenance etc.
b. Improve Infrastructure for retailing with focus on logistics and hygiene
c. Creation of certification and price administration bodies to oversee regulation of quality
and to assist with the upgrading of technical & human interface in the 'rural-to-urban
supply chain'.
d. Credit availability
e. Implement cross integration of India's existing long food supply chains such as dairy, fish,
fruit and veg to provide new products in new markets and help to improve consumer
choice, and increase employment and economic activity.73

By undertaking their recommendations, CPAS
believe that it will help to ensure that the
domestic and foreign retailers are on equal
ground, and that domestic retailers are not
especially disadvantaged. "The small retailers
must be given ample opportunity to be able to
provide a more personalized service, so that
their higher costs are not duly nullified by the
presence of big supermarkets
74
hypermarkets.
The research study undertaken by ICRIER (2005)
revealed that those against FDI in retail argue
that the entry of large multi-national retailers
could upset India's import balance, as a number
of these prefer to source globally (for example,
from China) and may prefer this to sourcing
from India. This view is supported by CPAS. In
a recent study, CPAS's Chairman Guruswamy,
and Sharma & Jos (2007) suggest the potential
problem of a 'China Pipeline'.

It argues that the efficiency of the large global retailers is due to their ability to procure goods
globally from the cheapest possible source. They are able to force prices down purely by
economies of scale, ie. purchasing such a large volume of any given item. China has "mastered the
complexities of the procurement-logistics supply chain and do provide huge standardised
volumes of quality household products at a low price within strict time schedules. Wal-Mart
procures £18 billion worth of Goods from China giving it a ready pipeline through which cheaper
goods can flow into the Indian economic hinterland.”

73. Guruswamy, K Sharma, JP Mohanty, TJ Korah, “FDI in India's Retail Sector; More Bad than Good?” Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPAS), New Delhi, 2003, page 16-19 -
http://cpasindia.org/reports/10-FDI-Retail-more-bad.pdf
74. Guruswamy, K Sharma, JP Mohanty, TJ Korah, “FDI in India's Retail Sector; More Bad than Good?” Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPAS), New Delhi, 2003, page 16-19 -
http://cpasindia.org/reports/10-FDI-Retail-more-bad.pdf

48
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
Those opposed also believe that foreign retail
investors may use predatory
techniques, which are aggressive and can force
out domestic players by selling at below cost
until the domestics have been eliminated. Then
the foreign retailers have a monopoly of the
market and can increase prices and reap higher
profits. This is not such an inconceivable
concept, as it has happened elsewhere in the
world which can be seen, for example in an
article by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance
where Wal-mart were charged with predatory
pricing in the United States in 2000.
The trading associations have pointed to the
fact that retail trade does not require large
amounts of investment to operate because
goods are bought on credit and sales are mainly
cash, and therefore the foreign retail investors
will not bring large inflows of foreign
investment. To the contrary, they argue that
75. http://www.newrules.org/retail/news/walmart-charged-predatory-pricing
76. Mukherjee A, Patel N, 'FDI in Retail Sector India', Academic Foundation in association with ICRIER, 2005, page 118
77. http://indiafdiwatch.org/index.php?id=80
"after making initial investment on basic
pricing infrastructure, the multinational retailers may
remit the profits earned in India to their own
country.”76
India FDI Watch is a national coalition of labor
unions, trade associations, environmentalists,
NGOs and academics that have formed to block
attempts by Prime Minister Singh's government
to allow foreign direct investment in India's
75
retail markets (www.indiafdiwatch.org). They
have produced several reports that argue that
India should say no to FDI in retail unless the
foreign retailers "make satisfactory guarantees
that would protect communities; insure the
stability of existing small businesses and
traders; guarantee fair wages and working
conditions for their own employees and source
employees along with union protection and
agreements; and insure that a significant
percentage of sourcing derives from the Indian
77
market.”
49
5.2 Arguments against FDI in Retailing
One particular India FDI Watch campaign interest”79 The proposed GATS agreement
believed that there is pressure on the would provide that an investor would not be
government from the IMF and World Bank to subject to the introduction of new barriers to
allow labour standards to be dictated by the investment in a host country, would be provided
demands of supply chain flexibility ie. 'hire and with post investment protection, protection
fire' policy. They argue that if the government against all material and intellectual property,
is to change labour laws (as it has already effective protection against direct
proposed to do in 2005), then the safe guards expropriation as well as against indirect
that have been in place to protect India's labour expropriation t hr o ugh d i sc r i mi na t o r y
force will be lost and the business environment treatment, a mechanism for compensation in
will be far more conducive to FDI and global the case of expropriation, a mechanism for the
integration, as the model used by global settlement of disputes, and the right to
retailers requires flexible labour markets to be determine its own ownership structure and
78
present. provisions for legal, regulatory and
80
administrative transparency.
The same campaign report argued that Trans This protection could be detrimental if India
National Companies (TNCs) are trying to bring decides to open FDI in retail, and then find that
in changes through the World Trade it is not successful. It will be too late for the
Organisation's GATS (General Agreement on government to go back on any decision, as the
Trade in Services) to "safeguard their vested GATS agreement may prevent them.

78. India FDI Watch 'Keep India Independent!', 2009, Page 23 - http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/FDI_in_retail.pdf
79. India FDI Watch 'Keep India Independent!', 2009,Page 25 - http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/FDI_in_retail.pdf
80. India FDI Watch 'Keep India Independent!', 2009,Page 25 - http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/FDI_in_retail.pdf

50
 Chapter 6 - Detailed analysis of factors
and conditions related to FDI

6.0 Survey Design & Sample

The survey sample consists of 70,000 people headhunting firms, and educational
who have registered to receive 'The India Retail institutions.
Newsletter', an e-web news service, which Out of the 70,000 participants in the survey,
provides the latest news on the sector. The there were 243 respondents. Figure 4 below
sample of people who are registered is made shows the profile of the survey sample used to
up of Retailers, Fast Moving Consumer Goods distribute the survey questionnaire, broken
(FMCG) companies and manufacturers, down by Industry. 91% of the chosen sample is
franchisors and franchisees, retail service employed in the Indian retail sector, and the
providers, real estate companies, software & IT remaining 9% are in inter-related industries and
companies, hardware and system sub-sectors.
manufacturers, consulting companies,

Figure 4

Survey Sample by Industry

1%
1%
2% 4%

1%

Retail
FMCG / Apparel / Manufacturing
Media
Real Estate
Information Technology
Other

91% Retail

A survey sample of this size is more than is required for the purposes of obtaining a representative
view of the domestic Indian retail sector. It covers not only participants who are within the retail
trade directly, but also others within retail-related sectors (as detailed above) and therefore should
provide the researcher with a balanced view from various viewpoints.

51
6.0 Survey Design & Sample
The questionnaire was designed to contain
both open and closed ended questions for a
number of reasons. Open ended questions
allow further clarification of the closed-ended
responses, as well as allow for thoughts and
ideas to be discovered that perhaps have not
been considered in the literature review and in
earlier stages of this research. The justification
for using closed-ended questions was to
counter-balance any mis-interpretation / lack
of response in the qualitative areas.
The questions were written after a preliminary
review of the initial literature discovered during
the early stages of the research. The closed
ended questions would be able to provide a
simple view of whether a particular respondent
believed, for example, 'Yes, FDI should be
opened up', or 'No, reforms policy are not
necessary'. The open-ended questions were
6.1 Questions
Please see Appendix II for Survey Questions.
52
then designed to link in to these closed
questions and to draw out more detail, by
encouraging respondents to give reasons as to
why the felt a particular way, or what they would
propose as solutions to a specific problem, for
example, possible labour displacement.
It was important to ensure that anonymity and
privacy were considered throughout the survey,
so as not to discourage participants, and to
protect their personal views and opinions.
Therefore, the preliminary data on the
questionnaire i.e. name, occupation, sector etc
were not compulsory. A 'respondent ID
number' was allocated to each response when
collated on to computer software so that
specific respondent comments could be
referred to in the analysis, and for ease of
reference.
6.2 Data Analysis
Below is a summary of the data results from the survey following analysis. There were 243
respondents in total, and 'no response' rates are recorded for those who answered some of the
survey questions, but not the specific question that is being analysed. The following analysis charts
display the results visually, but should be read in conjunction with Chapter 4.3 Results & Findings,
and using the Coding Key in Appendix I where appropriate. Each chart states if it requires the
Coding Key for interpretation.

No. of people aware of current FDI in Retail Policy

(Question 1)
No. of people

200
189

180

160

140

120

100

80

60
48

40

20
6

0
Yes No No response
Chart S1

Should the Indian Government open up FDI restrictions in the Retail Sector?
(Question 2)
No. of people
250

203
200

150

100

50
38

2
0
Yes No No response
Chart S2

53
 Coded Qualitative Analysis of Reasons why FDI should or should not be opened up in India
(Question 3 - please see Coding Key)
Coded Response

X 36

K 11

J 11

I 15

H 60

G 20

F 26

E 25

D 25

C 8

B 1

A 5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
No. of respondents
Chart S3

Are you happy with the current FDI Retail policy as it is?
(Question 4)
No. of people
250

199
200

150

100

50 41

3
0
Yes No No response
Chart S4

What conditions should be imposed on foreign retailers if policy is changed?

(Question 5)

None
Only Allow FDI In Specific Other Restrictions 13%
Cities/Areas 8%
0%

No Response
4%

An Exclusion Of Specific
A Minimum Investment Amount
Products For The Domestic
Requirement
Retailer
8%
3%
Equity Limits
4%

Only Allow Branded Products

Only Allow Certain Retail 17%
Formats (Eg: Malls)
12%

Certain Products Must Be

Manufactured/Sourced In India
By The Foreign Investor
31%

Chart S5

54
 Should Government reforms be made to support domestic retailers?
(Question 6)
No of People
180
170

160

140

120

100

80
70

60

40

20

3
0
Yes No No response
Chart S6

Coded Analysis of Suggested Reforms to Protect Domestic Retailers

(Question 7 please see Coding Key)

Y D
A C E
12% 1%
7% 2% 1%
(no reforms necessary) B
3% F
1%

H
G 3%
3%
I
1%

J
10% (Subsidy)

X
K
35%
0.3%
(no response)
L
N
1%
1%
M
Q 2%
T S R 3%
W 1% 3% 2% P O
1% V 6% 1%
1% U
0.3%

Chart S7

Will lifting restrictions on FDI in retailing allow more investment, technical skills and
consumer choice?
(Question 8)
No. of people
250

223

200

150

100

50

15
5
0
Yes No No response
Chart S8

55
 Coded Analysis of Suggested Solutions to potential Labour Displacement problem
(Question 10 - Please see Coding Key))

A
5% B
6%

C
11%
X
40%

D
28%

F
8% E
2%

Chart S9

Coded Analysis of the no. of people who believe the argument that "foreign
retailers will not 'own a stake' and therefore will make little investment…"
No. of people (Question 9 Please see Coding Key)
200
182
180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40 36
25
20

0
FALSE (A) TRUE (B) NO RESPONSE (X)
Answer
Chart S10

How many years should FDI policy be 'phased in' to allow domestic industry & market to adjust?
(Question 11)

No of people
50
46
45 43

40 39
38

35

30
27

25

20
17

15

10 9
8

0
0 1 2 3 4 5-6 7-10 10+
Years
Chart S11

56
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.1 Chart S1 (Question 1)

Are you aware of the current FDI in Retail Regulation & Policy?
The first question revealed that 77.7% of respondents were aware of current FDI in retail policy, with
19.7% not being aware, and 2.6% of respondents giving 'no response'. This data shows that a
significant amount of people within the domestic market place are paying an interest in the current
policies and how these could influence their industry and country. The awareness was anticipated to
be high, due to the very fact that the topic has been discussed in the Indian media many a time over
the last decade.

6.3.2 Chart S2 (Question 2)

Do you think the Indian Government should open up Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
restrictions in the Retail Sector?
It was evident from the responses that a significant number of respondents would like to see the
opening up of FDI in the retail sector.

83.5% of respondents said 'Yes', India should open up the FDI policy, whilst only 15.6% said 'No'.

A very small 'no response' rate was observed from this question at 0.9%.

These results show a strong amount of support for the concept of opening up FDI, although the data
analysis also highlights that there is still a small but significant (15.6%) group of people within the
domestic industry who oppose the idea of opening up FDI.

6.3.3 Chart S3 (Question 3)

Please give reasons for your answer to Question 2
Question 3 was an open ended question asking why participants thought FDI policy should or should
not be opened up. Responses were analysed and coded according to common themes. 11 themes
or categories were identified and allocated a code (please see Code Key in Appendix I for
identification of categories / themes.)

57
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.3 Chart S3 (Question 3)

24.7% of respondents believed that opening up FDI in the retail sector would allow for improved
skills, technology, innovation and best practices, as well as offer improvements to infrastructure,
supply chain and logistics, an improved competitive environment which in turn would lead to
consumer benefits. They also believe that it would increase employment and economic growth and
bring investment to the domestic sector including related-sectors such as agricultural and
manufacturing operations, This particular group of respondents (coded H) were 'particularly pro-
FDI' and gave multiple reasons (as above) as to why the sector should be opened up. Even more
revealing is that a further 45.3% of respondents mentioned either 1 or 2 of the above reasons for
believing FDI should be opened up.

Therefore, 70% of respondents believe that one or more of the above reasons are justification for
opening up FDI in the retail sector. This reflects a strong sentiment towards FDI, and is a sign that
the domestic market feels positively about the widening of FDI policy and the benefits it could bring
to the countries industry and wider economy.

A small number of respondents, 6.2%, made specific mention of the argument of allowing 'free
market efficiency' to reign, and for there to be less 'protectionism' within the retail sector.

4.5% were against the idea of opening up FDI yet, because they felt that the domestic market was not
developed enough yet. However, they also felt that in the future once the 'organized' retail had
grown and reforms had taken place, it would be of benefit to the country to allow FDI in the sector.

A further 4.5% of respondents felt strongly that FDI would be of no benefit and should not be
allowed. The researcher anticipated the number of respondents in this group to be higher, given
that 15.6% of respondents said 'no' to opening up FDI in Question 2 (see Chart S2). However, these
figures could differentiate due to the fact that a 15.2% of participants did not respond or make any
comments on Question 3.

58
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.4 Chart S4 (Question 4)

Are you happy with the current FDI Retail policy as it is?
Question 4 was intended to obtain a view of whether the domestic market was happy with the current
policies.

16.9% of people were satisfied with the policies as they are, while an overwhelming majority of
81.9% were dissatisfied with the policies as they stand today.

Only 1.2% of people did not respond to this question which is an acceptable level.

6.3.5 Chart S5 (Question 5)

If FDI policy is to open up in the future, do you think any of the following conditions should be
imposed on foreign retailers?
Question 5 was a multiple-choice question, with a number of suggested conditions that could be
imposed on foreign investors. Participants were asked to select a condition they felt should be
imposed (if any). The most significant group of respondents (31%), were those who felt that foreign
investors should have to source certain products from India. 17% thought that only branded
products should be allowed through FDI, while 13% of respondents felt that there should be no
conditions imposed on FDI at all.

In terms of retail formats, 12% believed that foreign retailers should only be allowed to operate in
specific formats, for example, malls, and a further 8% felt that a minimum investment amount should
be specified in policy. A smaller group of respondents (4%) felt that Equity limits should be put (or
kept) in place (as currently imposed on single-brand retail at 51% equity)

3% of respondents supported the idea of excluding certain products to protect domestic players, and
8% felt that 'other restrictions/conditions' would be more appropriate than the options available for
selection in the multiple-choice box in Question 5. The 'no response' rate on this particular question
was 4%.

The data from question 5 reveals a strong support for conditions that involve sourcing Indian
products, and thereby growing the manufacturing/agricultural industries and India's GDP. Branded
products and format restrictions were also supported by a number of respondents, but more
surprising was the 13% of people who supported 'no conditions' at all.

59
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.6 Chart S6 (Question 6)

Do you think that government reforms need to be made to support domestic retailers so that
they can face the foreign investment competition?
The data collected from Question 6 revealed that 70% of respondents felt that reforms should be
made by the government to ensure that the domestic retailers are supported. The other 28% of
respondents felt that no reforms would be necessary to support the domestic retailers. The 'no
response' rate was reasonably low at 2%.

When interpreting this question alongside Chart S2 (Question 2), it is evident that although 83.5% of
people felt that FDI should be opened up, 70% also felt that reforms were necessary to support
domestic retailers.

6.3.7 Chart S7 (Question 7)

Following Question 6, what reforms do you think should / should not be made?
Question 7 was open-ended, and aimed to discover what reforms the survey participants believed
would, or would not, help to support domestic retailers. The data was analysed and coded according
to common themes or specific recommendations for reform, which consisted of 25 different coded
categories from the 243 responses (please see Coding Key in Appendix I).

10% of the survey respondents recommended that the government provide subsidy to domestic
retailers, specifically in the form of low-rate loans/bank finance. In contrast to this, 12% felt that no
reforms were necessary in order to protect the domestic retailers. This group (coded 'Y') who
commented that no reforms were necessary, had a tendency to also mention that their preference
was for a 'free market' and that healthy competition would be preferred. There was also a tendency
with these respondents to commenting that the domestic players, particularly small 'kirana / mom &
pop' stores, would be able to survive alongside the foreign investors with out any issues. For
example, one respondent said “they [small retailers] will continue to exist, the kind of personalised
service, decision taking speed etc of small retailers can't be matched by big retailers.” (Respondent
ID no. 94)

7% of respondents (coded 'A') suggested the government invest in, and provide for equal access to an
organised wholesale & supply chain infrastructure, so that domestic retailers can become more
efficient, bring down their costs and offer better value so as to be able to compete with foreign
investors in the market place.

60
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.7 Chart S7 (Question 7)

Tax relief and tax incentives for domestic retailers was a suggested recommendation by 6% of
respondent, 3% felt that implementing educational retail training initiatives would be of benefit. A
further 3% recommended improving real estate regulations to facilitate the provision of land to
domestics and to provide for allocation of land and city planning.

Bureaucracy was raised as a concern, with 3% believing that there is a need to reduce administration
and formalities for domestic players to facilitate, for example, exporting or opening a new retail
outlet (which can require up to 30 licences).

6.3.8 Chart S8 (Question 8)

Do you believe that lifting restrictions on FDI in retailing will allow more investment, technical
skills and consumer choice?
Question 8 specifically asked whether people agreed Yes or No to that lifting restrictions on FDI
would allow more investment, technical skills and consumer choice in India.

91% of respondents answered 'Yes', believing that lifting restrictions would bring more investment,
technical skills and consumer choices.

7% answered 'No', and there was a 2% 'no response' rate on this question.

By comparing these results to Chart S2 (Question 2) it reveals that although 83.5% of people believed
FDI should be opened up, we can see that a higher proportion of people (91%) believe it would bring
increased investment, skills & consumer choice. This means that a number of respondents whilst
having said 'no' they do not believe FDI should be opened up, clearly acknowledge that it would bring
benefits to the economy/industry (in terms of investment & skills) and to society (in consumer
choice).

61
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.9 Chart S9 (Question 9)

It is argued by some who are against FDI, that foreign retailers will not 'own a stake' in India,
and therefore will make little investment, but reap the profits all the same. How can you
counter this argument?
Question 9 was an open ended question, which asked participants to counter the argument that
'foreign retailers will not 'own a stake' in India, and therefore will make little investment, but reap the
profits all the same'. The responses were analysed and coded according to whether they believed
the statement to be 'false' and disagreed - these respondents were able to counter the argument
with solutions to prevent this from happening, or believed the statement to be 'true' and agreed –
these respondents offered no counter argument and could provide no solutions to this potential
problem. (please see Coding Key Question 9, Appendix I)

75% of respondents believed the statement to be false, and provided simple solutions to the
problems, or argued that it was not an issue of concern. One particular respondent said that “Unless
the foreign retailers really invest in India, they would not be able to reap the profits. Only long haul
players will really benefit from the Indian market.” (respondent ID no. 56) Another argued that “It is
not true. As such, retail needs heavy investments both front end and back end. It is unlikely that
foreign investors can overlook this point and hence their financial involvement would be high. Yes,
there is certainly a fear of 'flight of capital' after some time, which needs to [be] protected with proper
regulations” (respondent ID no. 98). An interesting thought was also considered by respondent ID
no. 81; “by constructing businesses and providing fair wages, isn't that a defacto investment?”

10% believed the statement to be true. For example, respondent ID no. 141 said “I am for [this]
argument. I believe that fair returns should be in proportion to the investment made by the foreign
investors. Also the money in India should be used for the welfare and development of India first.”
Respondent ID no. 53 also agreed with the statement, saying “this argument has some validity.”

It is evident that the majority of people did not believe in the statement posed by Question 9. The
responses analysed, conveyed strong support for the concept that foreign retailers will be looking to
stay for the longer term in India (being that it has such huge retail market potential), and therefore
will have to invest in improving infrastructure, supply chain, technology and skills for example, so as
to make a success of their Indian operations.

62
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.10 Chart S10 (Question 10)

Can you think of any solutions to the potential problems of labor displacement in the
unorganized retail sector if FDI regulations are opened up?
Question 10 was an open ended question, where participants were asked to suggest ways in which
they thought one of the key problems, labor displacement, could be resolved.

The responses were analysed and interpreted, and coded according to general themes in response.
Please see Coding Key, Question 10, Appendix I

The data analysis revealed that 28% of the respondents believed that labour displacement simply
wouldn't happen. For example, respondent ID no. 91 said “I don't think that organized retail
presents any threat of labour displacement in the unorganised retail sector. Rather it would provide
better opportunities.”

To the contrary, 11% of respondents believed that there were no solutions to labour displacement,
and that displacement was inevitable if FDI in retail was opened up. This is not to say that the
participants were either for or opposed to FDI, but merely that labour displacement was not
something they believed could be 'solved'. Analysing this against the number of people that believed
FDI should be opened up in India (203 respondents), 12% of these respondents also thought that
labour displacement was inevitable.

This could be interpreted to mean that this group has accepted labor displacement as one of the
obvious risks of FDI, but that the benefits would outweigh the risks.

8% of respondents to question 10 argued that providing skills and comprehensive training to

existing 'unorganized' retailers would allow them to upgrade their businesses and be innovative so
as to continue employment in the retail sector without being displaced. A further 6% thought that
foreign retailers should be asked to invest in retail related facilities first and foremost, to offer
further employment in back-end services, manufacturing and farming, to compensate for the labor
displacement.

5% believed of people believed the Government should be responsible for providing and controlling
equal employment opportunities in both the growing 'organized' sector, and in back-end services.
These respondents had a tendency to believe that labor laws were in need of upgrading to support .

63
 6.3 Results & Findings

6.3.10 Chart S10 (Question 10)

The final group of respondents consisted of 3% who believed that there should be compensation,
rights and benefits provided to those that are displaced. No participant specified whether this
should be from the Government, foreign retailers, or both.

The analysis of Question 10 has revealed that the majority of people believe that either labor
displacement will not happen at all against those who believe if labor displacement does happen,
there is little that can be done to prevent it.

6.3.11 Chart S11 (Question 11)

Over how many years do you think FDI policy could be phased in to allow domestic
industries/markets to adjust successfully?
Question 11 was a closed ended multiple choice question, asking participants to say over how long a
period they thought FDI should be opened up to allow domestic retailers to adjust successfully (if at
all).

16% of respondents believed phasing in would not allow for any successful adjustment of domestic
retailers. This particular group believed also that the retail sector should be opened up imminently.

The majority of respondents, 48%, thought 1 to 4 years was adequate enough time to allow for the
successful adaptation of domestic retailers, with a weighting toward 2-3 years being preferable.

A further 19% thought 5-6 years would be more appropriate, 7% believed 7-10 years, and a small
minority at 3% thought that the phasing should be over a period greater than 10 years.

64
 Chapter 7 -Conclusion

7.0 Introduction
So as to draw conclusions from this study, it is appropriate to review the objectives that were set out
earlier in Chapter 1:-

1) To investigate the Indian retail market place and current policy & regulations with regards to
foreign investors.
2) Examine the arguments for and against changing current policy and improving the regulatory
environment
3) Compare the opinions of the Indian domestic retail sector so as to interpret market sentiment
towards foreign investment, and to explore thoughts on the issues faced by the sector.
4) Consider what solutions could potentially resolve the issues and are supported by the
majority of the domestic retail players.

7.1 Indian market place and FDI policy & regulations

It was clear from the literature review that India is a very unique market and has an extremely
dominant 'unorganized' sector that is concerned about the introduction of FDI in the retailing sector.

Since 1991, economic reforms have been underway to utilize more foreign investment and to
become increasingly efficient and internationally competitive. India has come a long way in this
regard, but there are still areas that require further reform and improvement. For example, there are
issues with labour laws, real estate regulations as well as general economic problems such as high
unemployment, inflation and 'jobless growth'.

Economic growth in India is good (with a 5 year average of over 8% real growth), and the retail industry
contributes approximately 40% of this GDP, and yet still has a very under developed 'organized
sector', and therefore offers exciting growth potential.

The Food & Beverages vertical has huge potential for the organised retail sector as to date less than
1% of this vertical has been penetrated by organized retailers. Clothing & Textiles also holds a fairly
significant share of the retail markets revenue. We believe that these are the two most likely target
sectors for foreign investors.

65

7.1 Indian market place and FDI policy & regulations
Changing consumer patterns appear to be a
large factor in the growth of the Indian
'organised' retail sector, with a burgeoning
middle-class, and a growing young population
with a willingness to spend. Consumer habits,
desires and incomes are changing and
demands for different retail formats are
emerging.
The retail sector in India does not have 'industry
status' and that this causes difficulties for all
concerned. Providing industry status would
allow comprehensive legislation to be put in
place to govern the running of the retail sector.
This in turn would assist in accelerated growth
of the retail sector and would remove a number
of barriers that are currently slowing down
growth, such as bureaucracy, formalities and
lack of finance for retailers, for example.
The literature review showed that current
investment policy is already quite liberal
towards FDI in many sectors, with only a few
sectors (predominantly service sectors such as
retailing) that are restricted. Retailing is
66
Chapter 7 -Conclusion
allowed via a number of methods such as
franchising/joint venture, but 100% equity is
only allowed in Wholesale Cash & Carry, and
51% in single-brand retailing. No multi-brand
retailing is allowed by foreign investors.
The recent changes brought about through a
series of Press Notes in 2009 have caused
confusion over the policy, as the changes allow
Joint Ventures to effectively create sub-
companies (cascading). We believe this may
encourage foreign investors to use this 'loop
hole' to create sub-companies so that they can
exceed FDI caps, and potentially enter areas
such as multi-brand retailing through the
'back-door' without technically breaking the
rules. There needs to be more clarity in this
area of policy. The literature review revealed
that although there are hurdles to be overcome
in the policy and regulatory environment, the
government seems to be working on various
solutions, for example, Special Economic
Zones.
 Chapter 7 -Conclusion

7.2 Arguments for & against changing policy and

improving the regulatory environment.
Those in favour of FDI in Retail argue the following reasons:-

1. The technical edge offered by foreign investors is crucial to the survival of domestic
retailers, particularly in the current downturn.
2. Knowledge & skills would be transferred.
3. Allowing 100% FDI will encourage domestic investment in the sector
4. Economic boost with increased FDI inflows
5. Improve the standard of living of the country as a whole (enhanced Human Capital)
6. Improve productivity and efficiency in management
7. Foreign 'low-cost' retailers will set-up/adopt integrated supply chain management, which in
turn will lower prices for consumers and improve the infrastructure of the country.
8. Increased FDI in Retail will ensure quality products and customer services
9. Will promote links between domestic/local suppliers, manufacturers and agricultural traders
with the global market
10. Sourcing / Exports from India would be enhanced.
11. Standards (quality, health & safety etc) & best practices would improve
12. Domestic players would develop new strategies to improve operations to counteract any
competition from foreign players
13. Foreign retailers would encourage employment in back-end services
14. Improvements in quality of employment
15. Reduce the number of intermediaries
16. Joint Ventures would help to ease the capital constraints of domestic companies
17. Most acknowledged that phasing-in should be considered and that some restrictions would
be required on equity limits, certain products, and certain 'zones'
18. Research suggests that 'unorganised' retailers have not been adversely affected by the
location and growth of 'organised' retailers nearby. Those that were affected, tended to
adopt new strategies to face competition
19. Improve transparency and prevent 'back-door' entry and 'loop holes'.
20. Not logical to have 51% restriction on single brand retailing when so many foreign single
brand retailers have already entered through the franchise route.
21. Retail Growth forecasts may not be achievable without FDI stimulus
22. Additional taxes will be raised for the benefit of India
23. Contribution to the long-term development of the country (ie. investment in education,
infrastructure etc)
67
 Chapter 7 -Conclusion

7.2 Arguments for & against changing policy and

improving the regulatory environment.
Those against the opening up of FDI in the retail sector argue the following reasons:-

1. FDI has a heterogeneous effect on countries, ie. the results vary. Some studies have shown
success of FDI in India, others have shown initial positive results but with a tendency on the
whole towards causing labour displacement.
2. The fast growth of domestic 'organised' retailing (40% per annum) would result in efficiency
improvements and increased retail sales which would in turn create employment and
economic growth, raising the question of whether FDI was required in this sector at all.
3. Retail as a 'Forced Employment' – the sector is one of the primary forms of 'disguised
employment / under employment' which acts as a shock absorber for the present social
system, soaking up unemployed people who have little alternative but to try and make some
kind of living.
4. Those displaced by FDI may not show up as a 'visible' increase in unemployment.
5. Foreign retailers may use predatory strategies to force out smaller competition
6. Various issues such as Bank Finance, conditions, safeguards, and improvements to
manufacturing sector are required to be addressed before FDI in Retail should be considered.
7. Potential to upset the import balance, with the creation of a 'China Pipeline'.
8. After minimal initial investment in basic infrastructure, Foreign investors may re-patriate
profits back home.
9. Foreign retailers should not be allowed until they make satisfactory guarantees to protect
communities, support small businesses and traders, guarantee fair wages and working
conditions, and ensure minimum sourcing from India.
10. Hire and Fire' Policy in labour law would be more conducive to an FDI environment, but
would destroy the safeguards that are in place to protect the labour force.
11. Amendments to GATS Agreements could mean that any policy changes on FDI will be
irreversible as investments will be protected and have immunity to new barriers to trade.

68
 Chapter 7 -Conclusion

7.3 Market sentiment and exploration of

domestic retailers' thoughts.
The survey revealed that there is a strong
market sentiment towards opening up FDI, with
83.5% of people supporting the opening of the
sector.
The domestic retailers who responded believe
that FDI in retail will bring the benefit of skills
transfer, technology, innovation and best
practises as well as supply chain, infrastructure
and logistics improvements. They also thought
that it would increase employment and
economic growth and draw more investment in
to the domestic sector and sub-sectors.
Overall, 70% of people believe that it would have
a positive impact.
A small percentage of people feel that India isn't
quite ready to open up its foreign retail policy
yet, but that it would be ready in the near future
and should begin planning a 'phased system'. A
minority (4%) believed there would be no
benefits at all of allowing FDI and were against
opening up policy.
This research has revealed that there is strong
support for imposing a condition on foreign
retailers to source certain products in India, as
well as some interest in restricting FDI to
branded products, and certain retail formats.

Interestingly, it was found that 70% of people also felt that reforms should be made to support
domestic retailers in the face of competition from FDI, whilst 28% felt that domestic retailers did not
need reforms to support them.

The data collated from the survey highlighted a number of recommended reforms to support
domestic retailers.

The reforms that were most commonly supported were, subsidies in the form of low-rate loans,
provision of equal access to organized wholesale & supply chain infrastructure and tax relief for
domestic retailers.

However, 12% of respondents felt that no support was necessary and that domestic retailers would
support themselves. It was also suggested that bureaucracy and formalities be reduced as this was
currently hindering domestic/foreign retailers and was restricting the growth of the sector.

69
 Chapter 7 -Conclusion

7.3 Market sentiment and exploration of

domestic retailers' thoughts.
Over 20 recommendations for reform to support domestic retailers were gathered from the data
analysis of the survey, for which the complete list is detailed in Chapter 4 & Appendix II.

This research has shown that an overwhelming majority (91%) believe that FDI in retail will bring
benefits in the form of further investment, skills and consumer choice. The study also ascertained
that 75% of people felt that foreign retailers would make a long term commitment to investment in
India and would not simply make minimal investment then 'repatriate profits'.

It is evident from the survey results that 28% of people do not support the view that allowing FDI will
cause labour displacement. This compares to 12% who believe labour displacement is inevitable and
11% who believe there are no solutions to this problem. India's domestic market is clearly divided on
whether there is even an issue of displacement.

We re-iterate that other countries have experienced varying results, and therefore there is no way of
knowing whether labour displacement will be non-existent, mild or severe in Indian retail. One
would imply that there is likely to be some displacement, but a well thought out plan and policy &
regulatory system will minimize the risks here, and perhaps prevent it from happening all together.

Survey respondents suggested the following ways in which labour displacement might be dealt
with:-

· Provide skills and comprehensive training to 'unorganised' retailers to allow them to

evolve/innovate and remain employed in retail trade.
· Foreign retailers should invest in back-end services, manufacturing and farming initially to
compensate for the labour displacement.
· Government should provide and control equal employment opportunities both in the
‘organised' sector and in back-end services.
· Compensation, rights and benefits should be provided to those displaced.

Nearly 50% of people believe a 1-4 year phasing in period would allow domestic players to
successfully adjust to foreign players, whilst 16% thought a phased system would not allow domestic
retailers to adjust anyway. 19% believed a 5-6 year phasing in period would be more successful,
while only 10% believed 7+ years was necessary.

70
 7.4 Recommendations

Based on the research carried out, we propose several recommendations for areas that have been
highlighted as concerning for FDI in retail. These recommendations are by no means an
exhaustive list but should serve as a framework for consideration of the various ways forward
with policy change:-

7.4.1Recommendation 1
The government should revoke the recent Press Notes that relate to permitting cascading sub-
companies, as these are only serving to provide a loop-hole for back-door entry by foreign
retailers and are not promoting transparency within the policy.

7.4.2 Recommendation 2
We recommend that the retail sector is granted 'industry status' as soon as possible so that a
legislative framework can be put in place for the control and management of the sector and its
day to day operation.

7.4.3 Recommendation 3
Begin recording detailed statistical data of the sector, both foreign, and domestic organised and
unorganised so that the impact of FDI when introduced can be closely monitored and policy fine-
tuned accordingly.

7.4.4 Recommendation 4
Labour Laws need to be reviewed to be more in line with the requirements of retail sector
employment.

7.4.5 Recommendation 5
Investment should be made by the government to improve the efficiency of the manufacturing
sector so that this sector can grow and provide more employment opportunities going forward.

7.4.6 Recommendation 6
City Planning needs to be addressed so that development is in such a way that it protects the
traditional trader areas and does not clutter the already densely populated city centers.

71
 7.4 Recommendations

7.4.7 Recommendation 7
Real Estate Regulations need to be considered for reform so as to facilitate access to land and
property for use by the retail sector, and to provide equal access to space for both foreign and
domestic players.

7.4.8 Recommendation 8
Certain sensitive products should be restricted from foreign retailing, so as to protect the
traditional craftsmen and unorganised traders. The products to be restricted needs to be given
thought and researched before any decisions are made.

7.4.9 Recommendation 9
The government should impose local employment quotas on foreign retailers, firstly to reduce
the effects of any potential labour displacement, and secondly to encourage foreign retailers to
provide training, skills and development to local people who without it would not be able to
transfer to the 'organised' retail sector or back-end services.

7.4.10 Recommendation 10
Rules on re-patriation of foreign profits should be revised, to discourage (and restrict) 100% of
profits from leaving India. Conditions imposed on requiring foreign retailers to invest a
minimum amount in infrastructure and supply chain capabilities would be beneficial.

7.4.11 Recommendation 11
Consider providing Tax relief and/or subsidy by way of low rate loans to domestic retailers to
provide support.

7.4.12 Recommendation 12
Implement a 'phased introduction' of FDI to the retail sector, say over 2-4 years, so as to provide
gradual adjustment for the domestic players and to allow fine-tuning and adjustment of policy if
issues arise.

72
 7.4 Recommendations

7.4.13 Recommendation 13
The government should reform price control policies to ensure that foreign retailers cannot sell
below a minimum price, rather than the current Maximum Retail Price (MRP).

7.4.14 Recommendation 14
Conditions of minimum sourcing from domestic agricultural and manufacturing sectors should
be imposed, so as to prevent the creation of a 'China Pipeline'.

7.4.15 Recommendation 15
Bureaucracy and formalities should be reduced by updating related legislation, for example,
reducing the number of licences required by businesses to open a store. This should assist the
domestic players in expanding and will help to streamline the efficiency of the sector.

7.4.16 Recommendation 16
Geographical restrictions for foreign investors need to be considered so as to reduce the impact,
or prevent the fast expansion of retailers in to rural areas. Special Economic Zones need to be
assessed with further research, to review their advantages and disadvantages to both India as a
country, and to the foreign players.

7.4.17 Recommendation 17
Other related regulations such as copyright law, need to be updated and brought in to line with
the needs of the future Indian retail sector.

73
 7.5 Further research

There are many areas that have been highlighted as requiring further research during this study.
Each individual argument for and against almost requires an entire research project to itself so
as to delve further into the complexities of each specific scenario, for example, Special Economic
Zones which have not been possible to cover in any detail within this study could provide an
interesting area of research so as to establish the advantages and disadvantages of operating
under a SEZ system.

Consumerism is an area that is worthy of further research so as to ascertain whether there is any
correlation between changes in consumer dynamics and the emergence of organized retail in
specific 'verticals'.

The GATS Agreements and World Trade Organisation Doha Round would also be another
interesting avenue of research. With the Doha Rounds to conclude in 2010, it would be
interesting to investigate how this might impact foreign investment in the retail sector in India.

74
 Appendix I

Code Key for Open-ended Questions (3, 7, 9 & 10)

Question 3

A. Improve skills, technology, innovation and best practises

B. Improve infrastructure, supply chain and logistics
C. Both A & B (tendency to be more concerned with improvements in retail industry)
D. Improved competition & consumer benefits
E. Increase employment and economic growth
F. Both D & E (tendency to be more concerned with consumers/society and the economy)
G. Increase investment in the 'organised' retail sector (believe required for growth of domestic
organised retail, including Agricultural/Manufacturing
H. Commented on all of the above (A-G) (very pro-FDI, believe its "non-sense not to open FDI in
retail")
I. Believe in “free market efficiency” and less protectionism (respondents gave a sense of political
disagreement and also had a tendency to agree with answer H i.e. Pro-FDI)
J. FDI shouldn't be opened up 'yet', but should be in the future. (believes the domestic market is not
ready/developed enough yet)
K. FDI will not be of benefit. (Against FDI being opened up at all)
X. No response / Uninterpretable response

Question 7

A. Invest in and provide for equal access to an organised wholesale & supply chain infrastructure
B. Protect Certain Products/formats from FDI and consider keeping 'sector caps'
C. Provide 'knowledge' and skills to existing domestic retailers to innovate and modernise
D. Remove intermediary middlemen in the supply chain
E. Price control regulations
F. Copyright/trademark regulations
G. Real Estate Regulations (including allocation of land / city planning legal framework)
H. Bureaucracy - reduce admin and formalities (inc. exports, legal, business formation)
I. Restrict FDI profits allowed to leave India
J. Provide subsidy to domestic retailers (including low-rate loans/bank finance)
K. Provide Platform for domestic retailer marketing
L. Implement procedures for data collection/monitoring of global/Indian retail & FDI data

75
 Appendix I

Question 7

M. Compulsory local sourcing for FDI (including policy to protect manufacturers/farmers)

N. Regulation/Checking to ensure international standards within retail sector
O. Restrictions geographically on FDI (e.g.: Special Economic Zones)
P. Tax relief / incentives for domestic retailers
Q. Implement Educational Retail Training initiatives
R. Require a percentage of Foreigner Investment to go in to Indian development projects
S. Friendlier Labour Laws and Goods & Services Tax (GST) introduction across India
T. Provide retail business with lawful 'industry status'
U. Any reforms necessary to protect the domestic retailers
V. Systematic study of each sector required to address reforms required
W. Ensure a 'phased' introduction of FDI
X. No Response / Uninterpretable / Misinterpreted the question
Y. No reforms necessary. Free Market / Healthy Competition preferred

Question 9

A. Believed the statement to be 'false' and disagreed. Were able to counter the argument with
solutions to prevent displacement from happening
B. Believed the statement to be 'true' and agreed. Offered no counter argument, or were unable to
provide solutions to prevent displacement happening
X. No Response / Uninterpretable / Misinterpreted the question

Question 10

A. Government should provide and control equal employment opportunities in organised and
backend services, and upgrade labour laws to support this.
B. Foreign investors should be asked to invest in retail related facilities first, to offer further
employment in, for example, manufacturing and farming industries. Includes requiring a fixed
quota of employment of Indians by the foreign investor
C. No - there are no solutions to the labour displacement that FDI will cause.

76
 Appendix I

Question 10

D. No - Don't believe labour displacement will happen (or will be very limited).
E. Provide compensation / rights / benefits to those who are displaced. Includes reform of
remuneration policy
F. Provide skills training to allow existing retailers to upgrade/innovate so as to continue
employment in the retail sector
X. No response / Uninterpretable response / Misinterpreted the question

77
 Appendix II

Survey Questions

1. Are you aware of the current FDI in Retail Regulation & Policy?
a. Yes
b. No

2. Do you think the Indian Government should open up Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
restrictions in the Retail Sector?
a. Yes
b. No

3. Please give reasons for your answer to Question 2.

4. Are you happy with the current FDI Retail policy as it is?
a. Yes
b. No

5. If FDI policy is to open up in the future, do you think any of the following
conditions should be imposed on foreign retailers?
a. None
b. Equity limits
c. Only allow FDI in specific cities/areas
d. A minimum investment amount requirement
e. An exclusion of specific products for the domestic retailer
f. Certain products must be manufactured/sourced in India by the foreign investor
g. Only allow certain retail formats (e.g. Malls)
h. Only allow branded products
I. Other restrictions…? (please specify)
6. Do you think that government reforms need to be made to support domestic retailers so
that they can face the foreign investment competition?
a. Yes
b. No

7. Following Question 6, what reforms do you think should / should not be made?

78
 Appendix
AppendixII

Survey Questions

8. Do you believe that lifting restrictions on FDI in retailing will allow more investment,
technical skills and consumer choice?
a. Yes
b. No

9. It is argued by some who are against FDI, that foreign retailers will not 'own a stake' in
India, and therefore will make little investment, but reap the profits all the same. How can
you counter this argument?

10. Can you think of any solutions to the potential problems of labour displacement in the
unorganised retail sector if FDI regulations are opened up?

11. Over how many years do you think FDI policy could be phased in to allow domestic
industries/markets to adjust successfully? Please select '0' if you don't think phasing in
would allow successful adjustment for domestic players.
a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
d. 3
e. 4
f. 5-6
g. 7-10
h. 10+

Preliminary, non-compulsory fields were as follows:-

Name
Title

79
 References
Appendix

AT Kearney, 2009 Global Retail Development Index–

http://www.atkearney.com/images/global/pdf/2009_Global_Retail_Development_Index.pdf
Chaze, Aaron, An Investor's Guide to the Next Economic Superpower, John Wiley & Sons pte,
Ltd 2006
CII / AT Kearney, Retail In India: Getting Organized to Drive Growth', November 2006
Dey, Dipankur, 'FDI in India's Retail Trade: Some Additional Issues', Aspects of India's economy
No. 43, July 2007 – http://rupe-india.org/43/retail.html
Elliott, John 'India's shaky FDI rules need clarification', FT.com, 9th July 2009 –
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c92b432a-6c6a-11de-a6e6-00144feabdc0.html
Farndon, John, 'India Booms, The Breathtaking Development and Influence of Modern India',
Virgin Books Ltd, 2007
Financial Express, Is FDI in Retail a Death Knell for SMEs', 27th May 2005 –
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Is-FDI-in-retail-a-death-knell-for-SMEs/138090/1
Gupta, Pankaj, Organised Retail in India, The Next Growth Frontier, Tata Strategic Management,
June 2006, page 2, (http://www.tsmg.com/download/article/TSMG_Tata_Review-June_2006.pdf)
Guruswamy et al, FDI in India's Retail Sector, Centre for Policy Alternatives, CPAS (2005)
Guruswamy, Sharma, Mohanty & Korah, “FDI in India's Retail Sector; More Bad than Good?” Centre
for Policy Alternatives (CPAS), New Delhi, 2003, page 7 - http://cpasindia.org/reports/10-FDI-
Retail-more-bad.pdf
Guruswamy M, Sharma K, Jos, Maria, 'Implications of Wal Mart's Backdoor Entry' Centre for Policy
Alternatives, New Delhi, 2007, page 1
http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/Implications-backdoor-entry_of_Wal-Mart.pdf
IBEF !ndia, 'Retail Markets & Opportunities', A report by Ernst & Young for IBEF, 2007
(www.ibef.in)
India FDI Watch 'Keep India Independent!', 2009, Page 23
http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/FDI_in_retail.pdf
Indian Realty News, ' Relax Norms on Foreign Direct Investment to Ease Fresh Infusion into
Retail', 12th October 2009 - http://www.indianrealtynews.com/retail-market/relax-norms-on-
foreign-direct-investment-to-ease-fresh-infusion-into-retail.html
Kalirajan, Kaliappa and Sankar, Ulaganathan, 'Economic Reform and the Liberalisation of the
Indian Economy', MPG Books Ltd, 2003
Kaplowitz, MD et al, Oxford Journals, Public Opinion website, 2004 -
http://poq.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/68/1/94
Kattuman, Paul A, recorded open ended email discussion - Judge Business School University of
Cambridge, 23 September, 9.55am. (available upon request)

80
 References
Appendix

Khatore, P & Parekh P, 'Wholesale FDI in Retail', The Hindu Business Line, 4th June 2009, –
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2009/06/04/stories/2009060450260900.htm
Knight Frank – 'Market Review' Quarter 3 2006
KPMG, 'Doing Business with India' Report, July 2009, page 85
KPMG, Investing in India, 2008, page 32 –
http://www.in.kpmg.com/TL_Files/Pictures/Investing.pdf
Kumar, Rajiv, 'Should India allow FDI in Retail?', The Economic Times, 11th August 2006, page 1
– http://economictimes/indiatimes.com/Opinion/Should-India-allow-FDI-in-
retail/articleshow/1882764.cms
Lonely Planet, 'India', 10th Edition, Lonely Planet Publishing Pty Ltd, August 2003
Mehta, Geetu, 'Indian Retail Overview' Birla Institute of Management Technology, 2007, page 2 –
http://bimtech-retail.com/article2.html
Ministry of Commerce & Industry, 'Guidelines for calculation of total foreign investment', Press
Note No. 2 (2009 series), Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, February 2009, page 3 –
http://siadipp.nic.in/policy/changes/pn2_2009.pdf
Rea L, Parker R, 'Designing & Conducting Survey Resaerch, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1992
Sagarika Dutt, 'India in a Globalized World', Manchester University Press, 2006
Sapford, Roger, 'Survey Research', Sage Publishing, 2004, page 47
Sathyaraj (2006) - http://retail-industry.blogspot.com/2006/04/definition-of-unorganized-
retailing.html
Saunders M, P Lewis & A Thornhill, “Research Methods for Business Students” Prentice Hall
London, 2003
Singh & Banga (2008), RetailDude.com, Guest Paper, page 2 –
http://bimtech-retail.com/downloads/FDI_RetailDude.pdf
Stewart D & Kamins M, “Secondary Research: Information sources and methods”, Sage, 2nd
Edition, 1993, page 37
Subbarao, P Srinivas, 'FDI and Human Capital Development', Indian Institute of Management,
February 2008, page 2
Tripathi, Karthik, Retailing360, Guest Column, 27th April 2009, page 1 -
http://www.retailing360.com/article/8/2009062420090624193427218739345f/Barring-
foreign-players-will-hurt-Indian-retailersKarthik-Tripathi-Silk-Hut.html
Mukherjee A & Patel, N, 'FDI in Retail Sector India', Academic Foundation in association with
ICRIER, 2005, quoted from foreword by A Virmani
Naoum, Dr S G, “Dissertation Research & Writing for Consttruction Students”, Butterworth
Heinemann, 2nd Edition, 2007

81
 References
Appendix

Nayak, Amar K.J.R. 'Multinationals in India, FDI and Complementation Strategy in a Developing
Country', Palgrave Macmillan, 2008
Radhika (2006) - http://retail-industry.blogspot.com/2006/04/definition-of-unorganized-
retailing.html
Whelan, Peter, 'India Economics', EDC Economics, May 2009, page 1 –
http://www.edc.ca/english/docs/gindia_e.pdf
http://www.dare.co.in/news/others/assocham-demand-industry-status-for-retail-sector.htm
http://www.newrules.org/retail/news/walmart-charged-predatory-pricin
http://www.allindiaretail.com/
http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c000709a.asp
http://www.answers.com/topic/triangulation?cat=technology
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~alandear/glossary/f.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/retailing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population
http://www.censusindia.gov.in/Census_Data_2001/India_at_glance/glance.aspx
http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/tif_e.htm
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/dda_e.htm
http://www.hindubusinessline.com/2005/11/24/stories/2005112403131800.htm
http://finance.indiamart.com/investment_in_india/fipb.html
http://www.ril.com/html/business/business_retail.html
http://www.investmentcommission.in/policies_and_laws.htm

82
 Bibliography
Appendix

Indian Council for Social Science Research, 'Towards a New Era: Economic, Social & Political
Reforms', Har-Anand Publications PVT Ltd, 2001
Denoon, David B H, 'The Economic and Strategic Rise of China and India; Asian Realignments
after the 1997 Financial Crisis', Palgrave Macmillan, 2007
Ray, Pradeep Kanta, FDI and Industrial Organization in Developing Countries: The Challenge of
Globalization in India, Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 2005
Advanti & Co et al, The New India, Opportunities & Strategies for Foreign Investment, Asia Law &
Practice, 1999
Kolanad, Gitanjali Culture Shock! A Guide to Customs and Eqiquette, Kuperard (London) Ltd,
1994
Todaro, Michael P, Economics for a Developing World, An Introduction to principles, probems and
policies for development, Third Edition, Longman Singapore Publishers Pte Ltd, 1992
http://www.iariw.org/papers/2009/8b%20Kolli.pdf
http://www.ncaer.org/downloads/indianeconomy/services/q2aug07.pdf (NCAER economic stats)
http://www.ncaer.org/downloads/indianeconomy/forecast/q2aug07.pdf
http://labour.nic.in/
http://www.tsmg.com/download/article/TSMG_Tata_Review-June_2006.pdf
http://dipp.nic.in/manual/FDI_Manual_text_Latest.pdf
http://siadipp.nic.in/policy/icrier_report_27052008.pdf
http://siadipp.nic.in/policy/changes/pn6_2009.pdf
http://www.edc.ca/english/docs/gindia_e.pdf
http://www.cds.edu/download_files/wp311.pdf
http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/WARNstorage/indiwm.pdf
http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/India_site/FDI_Broch_1_.pdf
http://www.bijapurkar.com/printerfriendly.php?filename=ct_cons_india_better.htm
http://www.bijapurkar.com/printerfriendly.php?filename=ct_cons_india_better.htm
http://www.bijapurkar.com/indiamyland/indi_celebrating_diversity.php
http://www.livemint.com/2009/06/08185249/Parliamentary-panel-recommends.html
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Is-FDI-in-retail-a-death-knell-for-SMEs/138090/1
http://www.indianrealtynews.com/category/retail-market/
http://bimtech-retail.com/downloads/FDI_RetailDude.pdf
http://bimtech-retail.com/downloads/Retail_Twist_RetailDude.pdf
http://bimtech-retail.com/downloads/RetailDude_Interview_1.pdf
http://indiafdiwatch.org/fileadmin/WARNstorage/indiwm.pdf

83